PROCEEDINGS OF THETHIRTY-THIRD SESSION

hosted by theGovernment of Papua New Guinea in

the Coral Coast, Fiji Islands

17-24 September 2004

SOUTH PACIFIC APPLIED GEOSCIENCE COMMISSION

PROCEEDINGS OF THETHIRTY-THIRD SESSION

hosted by theGovernment of Papua New Guinea in the

Coral Coast, Fiji Islands

17-24 September 2004

October 2004

2

The designations employed and the presentation of the material inthis publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatso-ever on the part of SOPAC concerning the legal status of any countryor territory or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of thefrontiers of any country or territory.

The mention of any firm or licensed process does not imply endorse-ment by SOPAC.

3

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION TO SOPAC ....................................................................................................... 4

OPENING ADDRESSES

Opening Prayer by Father Michael Igo, Pacific Regional Seminary, Suva ................................... 7

Opening Address by HE Mr Alexis Maino, High Commissioner for the Governmentof Papua New Guinea, to the Republic of the Fiji Islands ........................................................ 7

Opening Remarks by Outgoing Chair, Mrs Sisilia Talagi, Secretaryto Government and National Representative of Niue to SOPAC ............................................... 10

Opening Address by Ms Cristelle Pratt, Director of the SOPAC Secretariat .............................. 11

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE THIRTY-THIRD SOPAC SESSION .................................................. 13

APPENDICES

1 List of Participants ................................................................................................... 49

2 Agenda .................................................................................................................... 60

3 Designation of National Representatives ..................................................................... 62

4 Statements by Delegations

Part I: Member Countries ................................................................................... 64

Part II: CROP Organisations ............................................................................... 77

Part III: Supporting Governments & International Agencies ................................... 85

Part IV: National Institutions.............................................................................. 88

5 STAR Chair’s Report to Council ................................................................................. 90

6 Revised Rules of Procedure on Executive Appointments

A: Procedures for Appointment of Director ........................................................... 98

B: Procedures for Appointment of Deputy Director.............................................. 100

7 List of Conference Room Documents ......................................................................... 101

8 Acronyms ............................................................................................................... 103

4

INTRODUCTION TO SOPACObjectives

The South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC)is an independent, inter-governmental, regional organisa-tion mandated by several Pacific nations to:

• develop resource policy, and advise on the managementand development of onshore and offshore mineral andaggregate resources;

• meet the needs for water resources, waste management,health and sanitation through the provision of resourcepolicy and management advice, appropriate informationand training;

• support the information requirements and enhance theskills required for management and operation of the en-ergy sector in member countries;

• assist decision makers and planners to develop coastalzones and extract resources while protecting them fromdegradation;

• predict the effects of hazards on the health, wealth anddevelopment potential of member countries;

• assist decision makers and planners to understand oceanprocesses, develop ocean areas and extract resources whileprotecting oceans from over-exploitation and pollution;

• provide geoscientific and related education needs throughthe provision of a variety of training and education op-portunities at all levels of geoscience and resource man-agement;

• meet the demands for electronic information by membercountry governments and regional organisations to man-age resources and risk;

• support National authorities in disaster management ac-tivities through advice information; and

• provide readily-available and current information ingeoscience and related fields to member countries andothers.

Member Countries

Member countries are currently Australia, Cook Islands, Fed-erated States of Micronesia, Fiji Islands, Guam, Kiribati,Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, PapuaNew Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Kingdom of Tonga,Tuvalu and Vanuatu. American Samoa, New Caledonia andTahiti Niu are Associate Members.

Background

The Commission comprises the Governing Council (the mem-ber country representatives), the Secretariat (based in Suva)and the Technical Advisory Group (TAG). TAG comprises ad-visors who are nominated by member countries and by sup-porting Governments and organisations, or are invited by theSecretariat.

The Commission’s Work Programme is formulated from mem-ber country requests, and is carried out by its Secretariatbased in Suva, Fiji Islands.

SOPAC was established in 1972 as CCOP/SOPAC (the Com-mittee for Coordination of Joint Prospecting for Mineral Re-sources in South Pacific Offshore Areas) under the sponsor-ship of the United Nations Economic and Social Commis-sion for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). In 1984, CCOP/SOPACchanged its legal status to become an independent, regionalinter-governmental body, changing its name to SOPAC (SouthPacific Applied Geoscience Commission) in 1989.

Funding

SOPAC is funded by a combination of statutory and volun-tary contributions by its member countries and grants fromdonor governments and international agencies. An annualbudget of around F$10 million supports the implementationof the Work Programme and the operation of the Secretariat.

Supporting countries include Australia, Fiji and New Zea-land as members, Canada, France, Republic of Korea, Ja-pan, Norway, the People’s Republic of China, Taiwan, UnitedStates and the United Kingdom. The European Union, Com-monwealth Secretariat and UNDP are the principal multilat-eral supporting agencies. SOPAC has formal and informallinks with many other supporting agencies and institutions.Member countries provide considerable support during sur-vey work, and ship time in the region is regularly contributedby other countries such as the France, Japan and Germany.

SOPAC Annual Session

The SOPAC Annual Session is a meeting of the Commission,and has four components:

(a) a Plenary Session covers the procedural aspects of themeeting and the presentation of reports from membercountries, donor Governments and organisations, andthe Secretariat. This session is a meeting of the Councilat which other delegates are invited as observers, contrib-uting to the discussion of non-technical matters con-cerning SOPAC such as cooperation and funding.

(b) a meeting of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to con-sider the SOPAC Work Programme. All TAG membersparticipate as equals during this meeting.

(c) a meeting of the Science Technology and Resources Net-work (STAR ) which is an open forum for reportinggeoscientific research in the Pacific and for exchanginginformation and ideas between scientists from SOPACMember Countries and the international geoscientificcommunity.

(d) a Governing Council meeting to discuss the administra-tive and financial business of SOPAC, which may be opento observers who could speak when invited.

See the Table on the next page for a summary of past SOPACsessions.

5

SU

MM

AR

Y O

F S

OPA

C A

NN

UA

L S

ESSIO

NS

Sess

ion

Prep

arat

ory

FIR

STSE

CO

ND

THIR

DFO

UR

THFI

FTH

SIXT

HSE

VEN

THEI

GH

TN

INTH

TEN

THEL

EVEN

THTW

ELFT

HTH

IRTE

ENTH

FOU

RTE

ENTH

FIFT

EEN

THSI

XTEE

NTH

SEVE

NTE

ENTH

EIG

HTE

ENTH

NIN

ETEE

NTH

TWEN

TIET

HTW

ENTY

-FIR

STTW

ENTY

-SEC

ON

DTW

ENTY

-TH

IRD

TWEN

TY-F

OU

RTH

TWEN

TY-F

IFTH

TWEN

TY-S

IXTH

TWEN

TY-S

EVEN

THTW

ENTY

-EIG

HTH

TWEN

TY-N

INTH

THIR

TIET

HTH

IRTY

-FIR

STTH

IRTY

-SEC

ON

DTH

IRTY

-TH

IRD

Date

Jul 1

971

Nov

1972

Aug-

Sep

1973

Sep

1974

Sep

1975

Nov

1976

Oct

1977

Oct

1978

Sep-

Oct

197

9O

ct 19

80O

ct 19

81No

v 19

82O

ct 19

83O

ct-N

ov 1

984

Sep

1985

Sep

1986

Oct

1987

Oct

1988

Oct

1989

Oct

1990

Sep-

Oct

199

1Se

p-O

ct 1

992

Oct

1993

Sep

1994

Sep-

Oct

199

5O

ct 19

96Se

p-O

ct 1

997

Sep-

Oct

199

8O

ct 19

99Se

p-O

ct 2

000

Oct

ober

200

1Se

p-O

ct 2

002

Sep

2003

Sep

2004

Venu

e

Man

ila, P

hilip

pine

sSu

va, F

JN

uku’

alof

a, T

GAp

ia, W

SH

onia

ra, S

IR

arot

onga

, CK

Port

Mor

esby

, PN

Wel

lingt

on, N

ZSu

va, F

JTa

raw

a, K

IPo

rt Vi

la, V

AW

ellin

gton

, NZ

Nuk

u’al

ofa,

TG

Apia

, Wes

tern

Sam

oaH

onia

ra, S

IR

arot

onga

, CK

Lae,

Pap

ua N

ew G

uine

aSu

va, F

JC

anbe

rra, A

UTa

raw

a, K

IPo

rt Vi

la, V

AN

uku’

alof

a, T

GSu

va, F

JM

ajur

o, M

ISu

va, F

ijiR

arot

onga

, CK

Nad

i, Fiji

Isla

nds

Suva

, Fiji

Isla

nds

Nad

i, Fiji

Isla

nds

Tara

wa,

Kiri

bati

Maj

uro,

Mar

shal

l Isla

nds

Suva

, Fiji

Isla

nds

Alof

i, Niu

eC

oral

Coa

st, F

iji Is

land

s

Chai

rman

R.W

. Wille

tt, N

ZD

. Gre

en, F

JS.

Ton

gila

va, T

GT.

Ena

ri, W

SR

.B. T

hom

pson

, SI

G. S

awte

ll, C

KN

. Ago

nia,

PN

D. K

ear,

NZ

R. R

ichm

ond,

FJ

T. O

tang

, KI

A. M

acfa

rlane

, VA

H. T

hom

pson

, NZ

S. T

ongi

lava

, TG

K. E

teua

ti, W

SJ.

Sal

iga,

SI

S. K

inga

n, C

KW

. Sea

rson

, PN

S. S

opoa

nga,

TU

R.W

. Rut

land

, AU

T. To

kata

ake,

KI

C. M

ortim

er, V

AS.

Ton

gila

va, T

GA.

Sim

pson

, FJ

J. K

abua

, MI

D. R

itchi

e, A

UR

. New

nham

, CK

B. R

ao, F

JS.

Ane

fal, F

SMT.

Bar

rett,

NZ

K. R

uaia

, Kiri

bati

M. M

addi

son,

RM

IA.

Itsi

mae

ra, N

auru

S. T

alag

i, N

iue

A. M

aino

, PN

Vice

-Cha

irman

—S.

Tu’

a Ta

umoe

peau

,TG

R. R

ichm

ond,

FJ

P. M

uelle

r, W

SG

. Saw

tell,

CK

S. T

ongi

lava

, TG

R. R

ichm

ond,

FJ

S. K

inga

n, C

KA.

Mac

farla

ne, V

AA.

Mac

farla

ne, V

AS.

Ton

gila

va, T

GS.

Ton

gila

va, T

GL.

Ioan

e, W

SS.

Dan

itofe

a, S

IS.

Kin

gan,

CK

G. A

nder

son,

PN

S. S

opoa

nga,

TU

R. R

utla

nd, A

UK.

Kol

one

(Inte

rim)

C. M

ortim

er, V

AS.

Ton

gila

va, T

GA.

Sim

pson

, FJ

M. K

amin

aga,

MI

Nat

. Rep

. Aus

tralia

C. B

row

n, C

KG

. Ayi

n, F

SMG

. Ayi

n, F

SMN

at. R

ep. G

uam

K. R

uaia

, Kiri

bati

M. K

amin

aga,

RM

IA.

Itsi

mae

ra, N

auru

S. T

alag

i, N

iue

S. N

ion,

PN

S. P

otoi

, Sam

oaA

bbre

viat

ions

use

d:

AU

– A

ustral

ia;

CK

– C

ook

Isla

nds;

FJ

– F

iji

Isla

nds;

KI

– K

irib

ati; M

I – M

arsh

all

Isla

nds;

NZ

– N

ew Z

eala

nd;

PN

– P

apua

New

Gui

nea;

RM

I – R

epub

lic

of

the

Mar

shal

l Is

land

s; W

S –

Sam

oa;

SI

–

Solo

mon

Isla

nds;

TG

– T

ong

a; T

S –

SO

PA

C S

ecre

tariat

; TU

– T

uval

u; V

A –

Van

uatu

; U

K –

Uni

ted K

ingd

om

; U

N –

Uni

ted N

atio

ns;

US –

Uni

ted S

tate

s

Rap

porte

ur(s

)

— — — — — —J.

Wrig

ht, U

KG

. She

pher

d, T

SJ.

Wrig

ht, U

KJ.

Ead

e, N

ZJ.

Ead

e, N

ZJ.

Ead

e, N

ZD

. How

ell,

US;

J. E

ade,

NZ

N. E

xon,

AU

D. M

allic

k, U

KD

. Mal

lick,

UK

J. E

ade,

TS;

M. F

isk,

UN

J. E

ade,

TS

J. H

arpe

r, TS

H. C

reec

h, T

SA.

She

rwoo

d, T

SA.

She

rwoo

d/J.

Ead

e, T

SA.

She

rwoo

d, T

SR

. How

orth

, TS

R. H

owor

th/L

. Buk

arau

, TS

L. B

ukar

au/R

. How

orth

, TS

L. B

ukar

au/R

. How

orth

, TS

L. B

ukar

au/P

. Fai

rbai

rn, T

SL.

Buk

arau

/P. F

airb

airn

, TS

L. B

ukar

au/P

. Fai

rbai

rn, T

SL.

Buk

arau

/C. P

ratt,

TS

L. B

ukar

au, T

SL.

Buk

arau

, TS

L. B

ukar

au, T

S

TAG

Cha

irman

—R.

Wille

tt, N

ZR.

Wille

tt, N

ZJ.

W. B

rodi

e, N

ZJ.

W. B

rodi

e, N

ZD

. Kea

r, N

ZJ.

W. B

rodi

e, N

ZJ.

Wrig

ht, U

KM

. Ter

man

, US

J. W

right

, UK

J. W

right

, UK

N. E

xon,

AU

N. E

xon,

AU

H.G

. Gre

ene,

US

H.G

. Gre

ene,

US

J.V.

Ead

e, N

ZD

.J. M

allic

k, U

KC

. Hel

sley

, US

R.N

. Ric

hmon

d, T

SR

.N. R

ichm

ond,

TS

B. P

age,

UK

H.G

. Gre

ene,

US

R.N

. Ric

hmon

d, T

SD

. Pic

krill,

NZ

D. P

ickr

ill, C

anad

aA.

Mac

farla

ne, U

KD

. Tap

pin,

UK

D. T

appi

n, U

KT.

Bar

rett,

NZ

K. R

uaia

, Kiri

bati

M. K

amin

aga,

RM

IA.

Itsi

mae

ra, N

auru

S. T

alag

i, N

iue

A. M

aino

, PN

6

Pa

rtic

ipa

nts

at th

e O

ffic

ial O

pen

ing

of th

e 3

3rd S

OPA

C S

essi

on a

t th

e W

arw

ick In

tern

ati

ona

l Fiji

, Cor

al C

oast

, Fiji

Isla

nd

s.

7

OPENING ADDRESSESOPENING PRAYER by Father Michael Igo

Pacific Regional Seminary Suva

Your Excellencies, distinguished CouncilMembers, SOPAC Director and staff of the Sec-retariat, representatives of international, re-gional and national organizations includingCROP, ladies and gentlemen.

On behalf of Council, I would like to thank youall for being here, particularly all the scien-tists and technologists who support STAR, theScience Technology and Resources Networksupporting SOPAC. The SOPAC Council –STAR relationship provides a unique link be-tween science and policy, and I speak for allmy fellow Council members by acknowledgingyour contributions.

Let me begin by saying that Papua NewGuinea is most pleased to be hosting this 33rd

annual session of the SOPAC GoverningCouncil. Albeit we are hosting the meetinghere in Fiji we hope that we will succeed ingiving a strong flavour of both Papua NewGuinea culture and geology to the meeting.In this regard I commend to you the informa-tion on some of our Birds of Paradise and thethree themes for STAR we chose including; (i)minerals, plate tectonics and offshore mining,(ii) hazard assessment and risk managementand (iii) water, sanitation and human settle-ments.

As many of you will know, Papua New Guineawas a founding member of SOPAC back in1972. Whilst this may seem a long time ago,especially to many new members of Council,the Secretariat and STAR scientists, I am

pleased to note that the first geologist ap-pointed to the Secretariat when it becameestablished in Suva in 1974 is here with ustoday, Dr Loren Kroenke, now based at theUniversity of Hawaii. I am also pleased to rec-ognise that the person who provided much ofthe driving force to establish STAR, and whois also a good friend of Papua New Guinea, DrKazu Kitazawa from JAMSTEC is also here to-day.

As Chair of this meeting, and on behalf of mygovernment as a founding member, it wouldbe remiss of me not to recall that the newestmember of the Commission. Palau, who joinedlast year in Niue, is here today at the table forthe first time. I welcome the Palau delegationon your behalf. This brings to fifteen, a fullcomplement of independent Pacific Small Is-land Developing States which are on theSOPAC Council together with three associatemembers, Australia and New Zealand.

Let me dwell for a while on the question “WhyPNG and SOPAC?”, which I feel provides someinsight for why we, some 200 delegates includ-ing representatives from all 20 SOPAC Mem-ber governments are represented here today.From a national, regional and internationalperspective there are some imperatives.

First a national perspective. The geology of theislands and surrounding ocean waters of mycountry is diverse. Geologists I am told, wouldsay tectonically that some part of our rocksforms a salient portion of the Australian Plate.

OPENING ADDRESS by HE Alexis Maino

High Commissioner of the Government of Papua New Guinea to the Republic of the Fiji Islandsat the Official Opening of the SOPAC 33nd Annual Session

God papa, yu strong olgeat na yu bin kamapimolgeta samting long graun. Yu papa bilongolgeta samting na yu soim mipela bikpela laiklong mipela. Yu mekim manmeri olsem mastabilong samting blong graun long lukautim namekim gut ol samting.

Oi emu lalokau toana be Iesu Keriso ese iaha hedinaraia. Iesu ese aonega bona sisbanamona ia henimai. Emai aonega be lalokauese ia biagua bona oi emu aonega bona sisiba

ese tanobada gaudia ibonai ai ura henidia.

Father, we pray to send Your Spirit of Wisdomon each participant here. May this Spirit bringinsight and knowledge and guide our thoughtsthat what we share in this room may bringendless good for Your people in the Pacific. Maywe be appreciative of all that You have givenus through Jesus Christ Your Son and the HolySpirit, living and reigning with you, One God,for ever and ever. Amen.

8

Our location on the northern boundary of theAustralian Plate where it is colliding with thePacific Plate amongst others not only give riseto why our islands are what they are andwhere they are, but also underpins the veryrich and diverse resource base with which weare endowed. Our oil and gas deposits formedwhen the PNG region was an oceanic envi-ronment, and most recently the mineral de-posits, especially gold, and geothermal energyresources have formed beneath active volca-noes along the plate boundary. Over half of ourexport earnings are from these geological re-sources. Ironically, our geological location, onthat plate boundary is also responsible for agreat deal of the vulnerability of my country.The active volcanism and earthquakes, to-gether with the related hazards of tsunamisand landslides are a consequence. The physi-cal make up of our islands carved out of thegeology, interacts with the atmosphere to giveus a pleasant tropical climate which endowesus with surface and subsurface water re-sources, which we must secure to sustainlivelihoods and can turn into renewable hy-droelectric energy. Over geological time thisclimate has in conjunction with weatheringof our rocks, produced very fertile soils whichnow support a vital agriculture and forestryeconomy. Agriculture and forestry are to be-come more important as we seek to sustainthe livelihoods of our 5 million population anddiversify our economic base. Over half of thePacific Islands population of 9 million live inmy country.

Since independence in 1975 we have tried todevelop our national capacity to support andmanage the geo-related aspects of our devel-opment. Our national geological survey andhuman capacity building initiatives such asin the Geology Department of the Universityof PNG and Mining School of the University ofTechnology, have grown but have not beensufficient. Hence our active engagement overthe past thirty years in SOPAC (formerlyCCOP/SOPAC) and CCOP the geoscientificorganization of East and Southeast Asia. CCOPthe Committee for the Coordination of OffshoreProspecting, dating from the early seventies,when the Law of the Sea was being drafted,highlights the developmental importance weattach to the offshore marine environment ofour Exclusive Economic Zone. Currently theattention is focused on the fish, and in par-ticular tuna resources. But the economic geo-logical and biological resource potential of theseabed and in particular the submarine hy-drothermal vent areas associated with sub-merged pieces of that plate boundary are yetto be assessed and are likely to be huge. We

have one of the first private sector engage-ments in the Manus Basin looking at this po-tential. But we simply do not have satisfac-tory national capacity to carry out the neces-sary work and hence our membership ofSOPAC as one of the partnerships we haveactively explored to help us. This partnershipunderscores the regional geoscientific effortswe have engaged in to support our nationaldevelopment.

Internationally, we subscribe to many globalmultilateral agreements specially environ-mental ones such as the Law of the Sea I havealready mentioned. Sadly, the responsibilitiesthat these agreements bring have been a bur-den as much as they have brought benefits.Nonetheless we remain committed, confidentthat the benefits will flow, to the global agendasuch as currently underway with the 10-yearreview of the Barbados Programme of Actionfor Small Island Developing States and thepreparations for the Second World Conferenceon Disaster Reduction. Both these global ac-tivities are underway as I speak and in whichthe SOPAC Secretariat is playing a key roleon behalf of all Council members, not justPNG. This is a smart use of our collective re-gional pool of resources rather than each hav-ing to commit significant and scarce if at allnational time and money.

Delegates, I have dwelt for some time on thequestion, why PNG and SOPAC, and in theprocess I hope I have underscored some of theobvious reasons for why we need a regionalorganization such as SOPAC, to provide thescope of services and support. Let me turn tosome perhaps less obvious critical rationalefor SOPAC both now and in the future. OurLeaders have recently launched a new Vision,to be progressed through the development andimplementation of a Pacific Plan to embeddeeper regional cooperation. For the many ofyou here today who are not readily familiarwith this new Vision, I will paraphrase. Lead-er’s wish, …to have a Pacific region as one ofpeace, harmony, security and economic prosper-ity, so that all of its people can lead free andworthwhile lives; a region that is respected forthe quality of its governance, and the sustain-able management of its resources, and seek part-nerships with our neighbours and beyond to de-velop our knowledge, to improve our communica-tions and to ensure a sustainable economic ex-istence for all….

Pacific Island countries, amongst Small IslandDeveloping States generally, share a uniqueresponsibility for good governance for a verylarge part of the planet. As 90 percent of theirsovereign territory is ocean and as signato-

9

ries to the United Nations Convention on theLaw of the Sea, countries must manage theirocean resources wisely and sustainably for thegood of their peoples and global partners.

The large ocean, small islands and peoplesemphasises the unique context of Pacific Is-land Countries and provides a fitting contextto the Leader’s vision. This context is embed-ded in one of SOPAC’s three key strategic workareas; the Ocean and Islands Programme. Thischaracteristic accounts for many of theirvulnerabilities which in turn provide eco-nomic, environmental and social challengesto sustainable development. This situation isparticularly underscored in low-lying islandsand atolls.

Whilst my country is amongst the largest landarea and most populated in the region, we rec-ognise that the Pacific Ocean is the largestsingle physical feature on the Earth. It com-prises nearly one half of the Earth’s oceanspace, which in total occupies nearly threequarters of the surface of our planet. It is theengine room of the planet; as such the PacificOcean is the storeroom of much of the incom-ing solar radiation that drives life on Earth.The daily and longer-term interactions be-tween the ocean surface and the lower atmos-phere in turn drive our weather and climate,and over time have determined the fertility ofour soils and a large part of our land-basedresource potential.

Our small, widespread and often isolated is-lands are situated in the middle of this globalenergy flux. The coastlines provide the singleinterface between the ocean, atmosphere andland. Our small islands have long coastlinesper unit land area thus commonly provides thefocus for social and economic development.Social and economic development require safeand secure access to water, energy and infor-mation and communication technologies allkey work areas of the SOPAC Community Life-lines Programme. These unique circum-stances account for much of the vulnerabilityof Pacific Island Countries. Building resilienceto these vulnerabilities is another key workarea of SOPAC: the Community Risk Pro-gramme. It is vital we fully understand theseocean, atmosphere, land interactions as forexample our exposure to climate change, cli-mate variability such as ENSO events, andextreme weather events is increasing. Effec-tive early warning will only come from thisbetter understanding translated into publicawareness programmes.

Sustainable development must be accepted as

overarching and international best practice atthis time. It requires the integration of itsthree components or pillars - economic devel-opment, social development and environmen-tal protection - as interdependent and mutu-ally reinforcing. Fundamentally, interdepend-ence and mutually reinforcing requires anintegrated, holistic way of thinking and doingdevelopment. As such sustainable develop-ment gets away from the “silo mentality”which in the past, thinking and doing by sec-tors promoted. In SOPAC these three pillarsare respectively: (i) economic pillar- Commu-nity Lifelines Programme; social pillar- Com-munity Risk Programme; environment pillar-the Ocean and Islands Programme.

Sustainable development promotes a “bigthinking” programmatic, as opposed to aproject-based, approach to development. Pro-grammes which of necessity are multi-stakeholder, and cross traditional institu-tional boundaries. Whilst there may be iden-tified issues that are truly and exclusivelyeither economic, social or environmental,many overlap two pillars whilst indeed sus-tainable development is the issue where allthree pillars overlap. Likewise in SOPACwhere governance and security are cross cut-ting all programmes, and using geoscience tocontribute to sustainable development is em-bedded in the goal of the Commission.

In summary, I hope I have in some way ad-dressed the question why PNG and SOPAC,first over thirty years ago, and also why nowthe reshaped SOPAC is a finely honed regionaltool assisting both my country and our Pacificisland neighbours, in pursuit of the new glo-bal paradigm of sustainable development.SOPAC also stands ready to contribute to re-alising the Forum Leaders new vision for theregion through participating in the develop-ment and implementation of the Pacific Plan,so that all our people can lead free and worth-while lives.

Delegates, I wish to close by highlighting thatbefore us is a busy agenda for Council all is-sues are important though I am sure somewill naturally assign greater importance tosome items as national needs dictate. I willendeavour as your Chair to manage the meet-ing in order to ensure we remain focused onthe collective key items. On behalf of my Gov-ernment, I congratulate the SOPAC Secre-tariat for facilitating PNG’s flavour and beau-tifully organising the meeting, and I wish youall well for a successful outcome.

Thank you

10

REMARKS by Mrs Sisilia Talagi

Secretary to Government, Niue; National Representative of Niue to SOPACand Outgoing Chair as read by Deve Talagi

Honored Guests, Dinstinguished Representa-tives, Donor Representatives, Country Del-egates, Director of SOPAC and Staff of the Sec-retariat, Ladies and Gentlemen

Firstly, I would like to extend the sincere apolo-gies of the outgoing SOPAC chair, Mrs SisiliaTalagi, for not being able to attend this SOPACSession due mainly to other pressing commit-ments of government.

On behalf of the outgoing chair, the SOPACmember countries and all of us present in thisCouncil Session, I wish to thanks HE AlexisMaino for his opening statement to Council.

But I’m proud to read the following preparedstatement on her behalf:

…..On behalf of the Government and People ofNiue, I would like to convey warm greetingsto you all.

The year of Niue’s chairmanship has been amixture of opportunities and challenges.

First and foremost is the challenge to theCouncil’s decision on the appointment of theDirector of the organization. This was verydifficult to counter in light of the many impli-cations either way, at the time the challengewas put. But I was thankful for the way that ithas allowed us all to get on with our every daybusiness as well as allow the organization tofunction with integrity.

On of the major follow-up actions, which wasan opportunity missed, and that we were notable to be resolved out of session, was the re-view of the Constitution which dealt with Ex-ecutive appointments. Whilst the Council, insession, was adamant for some changes, Iunderstood from the Secretariat that the di-vergence in views prohibited any advance-ment, out of session, on the matter. There-fore this is one of the issues that must be re-solved, in session, at this current Councilmeet ing.

The second challenge which confronted theChair personally, was the unprecedented dev-astation that was inflicted by Cyclone Heta onNiue, in early January. The reaction to thisevent took precedent, and clouded my aim atworking with the SOPAC Secretariat, duringNiue’s chairmanship of the Council, to ad-vance on some issues.

The Cyclone Heta event brought issues to the

fore, that I felt Niue would offer a lot to anyregional or international fora for Disasters.The event even tapped and drew on all theresources available to one during the responseand the recovery process after a disaster.While a lot of offers of assistance were ex-tended to Niue from the region, after theevent, the assistance by the CROP agenciestook time to materialise, compared with theimmediate mobilisation of bilateral assist-ance.

I must emphasise that the region’s cyclonewarning centre must be better resources, orif not, then the PICs must have a second op-tion, to link to Hawaii or NZ that are way waybetter resourced to assist the Pacific Islandcountries.

However, I must thank SOPAC for the techni-cal assistance extended to Niue, from whicha report is due.

We should also thank the SOPAC Secretariatfor the work they have done during the pastyear. The success of any organization usuallyconfirms that the right people have been ap-pointed to the key positions, who have theright aptitude to see the Pacific region ad-vanced in every aspect of environmental pro-tection, security and sustainable develop-ment, as well as the Millennium DevelopmentGoals.

The follow up actions to the EPG exercise lastyear, no doubt will have a bearing on the fu-ture work of the organization.

The organisation’s input to the Pacific Plan,should assert itself as one of the regional agen-cies with an important role, because it ad-dresses matters that touch the very basichuman security.

SOPAC’s leading role in the development ofthe Environmental Vulnerability Index issomething to be proud of, and to have continu-ing support.

I would also like to thanks and acknowledgethe support of the donors and developmentpartners, in assisting the development of Pa-cific Island Countries, through SOPAC.

Last, but not least, I would like to take thisopportunity to wish the incoming chair all thebest during his term of chairmanship.

Thank you all. Fakaue lahi.

11

OPENING ADDRESS by Ms Cristelle Pratt

Director of the SOPAC Secretariatat the Official Opening of the SOPAC 33rd Annual Session

1. Chair of the SOPAC Governing Counciland distinguished members of Council, Excel-lencies, Heads of Delegations, Heads of CROPand Representatives of international, regionaland national organisations, Ladies and Gen-tlemen.

2. On behalf of the SOPAC Secretariat, goodmorning and a warm welcome to this the open-ing of the 33rd Annual Session of the SOPACGoverning Council, which is being hosted bythe Government of Papua New Guinea.

3. Papua New Guinea last hosted an AnnualSession of the SOPAC Governing Council in1987 at home in Lae. Since then, our mem-bership has increased to twenty and our leadresponsibilities have expanded considerably toinclude amongst others energy, water andsanitation, and disaster risk management.

4. Chair, it would be remiss of me not tomention, at this juncture, the great chal-lenges and hardships that your country hashad to face following the devastation wroughtby Cyclone Heta. SOPAC responded, under acollaborative CROP initiative to provide sup-port in post-damage assessment and I assureyou that we will continue to provide technicalsupport to Niue to mainstream disaster riskmanagement practices.

5. SOPAC, this past year has also been filledwith challenges, although not nearly of themagnitude that your country has had to face,Chair.

6. SOPAC has, since February, had to getuse to a new Director. Fortunately my pred-ecessor Alf Simpson left behind a robust andhealthy Secretariat and it was he that em-braced and championed the change toward astrategic programme approach. I would like totake this opportunity to acknowledge this. Aswell, the Secretariat has a complement ofhighly skilled and dedicated technical profes-sionals that ascribe to a performance culturethat I believe should be encouraged. So withthose as givens, my challenge is to maintainrelevance, improve delivery and seekefficiencies.

7. Since the 32nd Annual Session, aside

from delivery against its annual work pro-gramme and drafting a new corporate plan andprogramme strategies, which will be consid-ered by Council at this Session, SOPAC hasalso provided support to member countries ona number of important global initiatives, whichhave implications for all of us. They includethe 12th Meeting of the Commission on Sus-tainable Development, which considered wa-ter and sanitation [clearly a priority for ourregion], the Barbados + 10 Review process andthe 2nd World Conference for Disaster RiskReduction. We will continue to provide supportto member countries up until the two men-tioned world conferences are held in Januarynext year, as well as toward their preparationsfor the 13th Meeting of the Commission onSustainable Development, which will continueits considerations of water and sanitation.

8. At the regional level the Secretary Gen-eral of the Pacific Islands Forum, who is withus today, invited SOPAC to assist in prepara-tory work required by the Forum Leaders, forthe development of a framework for the Pa-cific Plan as well as to assist in completing anassessment of the current state of our regionalcooperation.

9. Chair, the challenge for next year willbe to ensure that there is a Pacific Plan. Thatit addresses real priorities and issues; that itis developed through wide consultation withall stakeholders; and, that we as a regionalorganisation are proactive throughout its de-velopment.

10. The bigger challenge beyond will be toensure that the Pacific Plan is implementableand that the Leaders vision of a region whereits people can lead free and worthwhile lives,is achievable.

11. For this we will need to find and embracenew ways of working together, as well as prag-matic mechanisms to address the prioritiesthat are identified.

12. Chair, Excellencies, Distinguished del-egates and colleagues I thank you for your at-tention and wish every success to forthcom-ing deliberations of the SOPAC GoverningCouncil.

12

13

SUMMARY RECORD OF THETHIRTY-THIRD SOPAC SESSION

FORMAL OPENING SESSION

1. OPENING

1. The Thirty-third Session of the SouthPacific Applied Geoscience Commission(SOPAC1), was held on the Coral Coast,Sigatoka, Fiji Islands, from 17th to 24th Septem-ber 2004. It’s Council Sessions including thejoint session with its Technical AdvisoryGroup (TAG) and preceding two-day scientificmeeting of its Science, Technology and Re-sources Network (STAR) were all held at theWarwick International Fiji. The 2004 STARMeeting is the 21st meeting of the group.

2. The Governing Council meeting wascalled to order by Mr Deve Talagi, representa-tive of Niue on behalf of Mrs Sisilia Talagi,Secretary to Government and Outgoing Chairof the SOPAC Governing Council. Her state-ment was a reflection on the challenges andopportunities of the year – highlighting the‘missed opportunity’ of being unable to resolve,out of Session, the Council decision to reviewits rules and procedures on “executive appoint-ments”; and the personal challenge of theunprecedented devastation of Niue by CycloneHeta. Her statement is tabled in full in thisvolume.

3. The opening prayer was offered by FatherMichael Igo, Pacific Regional Seminary, in thethree main languages used in Papua NewGuinea.

4. His Excellency, Alexis Maino, Papua NewGuinea High Commissioner to Fiji, gave theOpening Address on behalf of the Governmentand people of Papua New Guinea; in which hewished for a successful outcome of the Gov-erning Council deliberations. The High Com-missioner welcomed Palau, the newest and20th member of SOPAC, which was repre-sented for the first time at this GoverningCouncil. He further acknowledged the pres-ence at the Session of Dr Loren Kroenke andDr Kazuhiro Kitazawa who he credited as be-ing instrumental in the establishment of theSOPAC Secretariat and the STAR Group, re-spectively. The High Commissioner went on

to highlight the diverse nature of the geologyof the islands and sea area of Papua NewGuinea, and sketched a short history of hiscountry’s attempts at national capacity build-ing to support and manage the geo-relatedaspects of Papua New Guinea’s development –all this to answer the question, “Why PNG andSOPAC?” He also looked to the future, specifi-cally to the Pacific Plan, which is a vision ofthe Pacific leaders to forge even deeper re-gional cooperation, given the large ocean andsmall islands context of Pacific island coun-tries. He declared that SOPAC was ready tocontribute to realising the Forum leaders’ vi-sion for the region through participating in thedevelopment and implementation of the Pa-cific Plan; so that all the Pacific’s peoples couldlead free and worthwhile lives. The High Com-missioner’s address is tabled in full in thisvolume.

5. The Director of SOPAC, Ms CristellePratt, welcomed all the delegates to the SOPACGoverning Council meeting, making specialmention of the many changes that had oc-curred within SOPAC in the intervening yearsfrom when the Government of Papua NewGuinea last hosted an annual session in 1987.She acknowledged her predecessor’s contri-butions that left a robust and healthy Secre-tariat, and the complement of highly-skilledand dedicated technical professionals. Sherecognised that her challenge was to main-tain relevance, improve delivery, and seekefficiencies. Her remarks are tabled in full inthis Proceedings volume.

6. Delegates from the following membercountries were in attendance: American Sa-moa (Associate), Australia, Cook Islands, Fed-erated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Guam,Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Caledo-nia (Associate), New Zealand, Niue, Palau,Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands,Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. A full list of par-ticipants is appended as Appendix 1.

7. Australia Marine Science and Technol-ogy (AMSAT), British Geological Survey (BGS),Geoscience Australia, Georgia Institute ofTechnology, Institute of Geological and Nu-clear Sciences (IGNS), Institut de Recherchepour le Developpement (IRD), JAMSTEC, Ja-pan Oil, Gas and Metal National Corporation(JOGMEC), Korea Institute of Geoscience and

1 A comprehensive list of ACRONYMS is included as Appendix 8 ofthis Proceedings volume

14

Mineral Resources (KIGAM), Korea Ocean Re-search and Development Institute (KORDI),Landcare Research, Metropolitan Fire andEmergency Services, National Institute ofWater and Atmospheric Research (NIWA),Natural Hazards New Zealand, Nautilus Min-erals Ltd, Pacific Power Association, Taiwan(ROC), The Asia Foundation, The AustralianBureau of Meteorology, The PennsylvaniaState University, UNDP, University of Califor-nia, UNESCO-IOC, University of Hawaii, USA/Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre, VictoriaUniversity of Wellington; attended as observ-ers and supporters of SOPAC.

8. The following CROP organisations wererepresented: Pacific Islands Forum Secre-tariat (PIFS), Secretariat of the Pacific Com-munity (SPC), Secretariat of the Pacific Re-gional Environment Programme (SPREP); andthe University of the South Pacific (USP).

9. Other institutions and representativesof the private sector and civil society were alsorepresented. These are fully documented inthe List of Participants in Appendix 1.

2. ELECTIONS

10. On behalf of the Outgoing Chair, Mr DeveTalagi expressed deep gratitude to his fellowGoverning Council members and the Secre-tariat for their support and assistance duringNiue’s tenure as Chair of the SOPAC Govern-ing Council.

2.1 Chairs and Vice-Chair of SOPAC

11. In accordance with the Rules of Proce-dure, HE Alexis Maino, Ambassador of PapuaNew Guinea to Fiji, assumed the Chair of theSOPAC Governing Council on behalf of theGovernment of Papua New Guinea; and therepresentative of Samoa, was appointed Vice-Chair of SOPAC.

2.2 Chairs of STAR and TAG

12. Council accepted STAR’s nomination ofProfessor John Collen of Victoria Universityof Wellington to continue as Chair of STAR andJoe Buleka of Papua New Guinea, along withLameko Talia of Samoa as co-Vice Chairs.

2.3 Appointment of Rapporteur

13. Ms Lala Bukarau was appointed Rappor-teur.

3. AGENDA AND WORKING PROCEDURES

3.1 Adoption of Agenda

14. The Governing Council adopted the pro-visional agenda as presented in AS33/3.1 Rev2. The approved agenda is attached in Appen-dix 2.

15. They also accepted the draft workingschedule (AS33/3.1/Info1), working proce-dures (no paper), and noted the list of confer-ence room documents (AS33/3.1/Info3 Rev).

3.2 Appointment of Drafting Committee

16. An open-ended drafting committee wasappointed comprising Federated States ofMicronesia, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Samoaand Tuvalu as the core group to oversee theproduction of a Summary Record of Proceed-ings. According to the Rules of Procedure, Sa-moa was appointed Chair of the Drafting Com-mittee.

3.3 Appointment of Sub-Committees

17. While no sub-committee was appointed,it was noted that the review of the Rules ofProcedure on Executive Appointments out-of-session by a Council sub-committee had notprogressed. It was hoped that a resolutionwould be found through further out-of-sessiondiscussions, among concerned member coun-tries, already begun in the margins of thisCouncil meeting.

4. REPRESENTATION

4.1 Designation of National Representatives

18. The Chair invited responses from allmember country delegates to confirm the in-formation given in paper AS33/4.1 (Designa-tion of SOPAC National Representatives) thatwas circulated. The amended full list is at-tached as Appendix 3.

5. STATEMENTS

19. Council agreed to the Chair’s suggestedprocedure to hand in written statements tothe Secretariat to be tabled in full in the Coun-cil’s 33rd Session Proceedings. Most member-country delegations made short interventions

15

specifically acknowledging donor support; andhighlighting the positive contributions of theSOPAC Work Programme toward their nationaldevelopment.

20. Most other delegates expressed theirsupport for; and continued commitment towork in partnership with SOPAC to achievecommon goals in the SOPAC region.

5.1 Statements from Member Countries

21. These statements are tabled in full inAppendix 4, Part I.

5.2 Statements by CROP Organisations

22. These statements are tabled in full inAppendix 4, Part II.

5.3 Statements from Supporting Governmentsand International Agencies

23. These statements are tabled in full inAppendix 4, Part III.

5.4 Statements from National Institutions

24. These statements are tabled in full inAppendix 4, Part IV.

JOINT COUNCIL TECHNICALADVISORY GROUP SESSION

6. ISSUES COMMON TO ALL PROGRAMMES

6.1 SOPAC Reports

6.1.1 2003 Annual Report Summary

25. The Director presented conference roompaper AS33/6.1.1, the cover note to the SOPACAnnual Report Summary for 2003, indicatingits early production in the first quarter of 2004enabled maximised dissemination of it wellbefore the Pacific Islands Forum in early Au-gust 2004.

26. Council accepted the 2003 Annual Re-port Summary and agreed to use it in promot-ing the work of SOPAC.

6.1.2 Summary Report of 2004 Donor Support

27. The Director highlighted key points of thereport circulated to Council and indicated thelevels of support provided to SOPAC activitiesby key donors including Australia, New Zea-land, Fiji, Canada, Peoples Republic of China,Commonwealth Secretariat, European Union,France, Ireland, Italy, Norway, Japan, Taiwan/ROC, United Kingdom (DFID), UN agencies –UNDP, UNEP, IOC/UNESCO, ESCAP, UNDESA,WHO, USAID – OFDA, Asian DevelopmentBank, World Bank, the International Instituteof Infrastructural, Hydraulic and Environmen-tal Engineering and further member-countryinput from the Cook Islands, Kiribati, Nauru,Vanuatu and Fiji, for bilateral projects.

28. Council accepted the report and ac-knowledged, with pleasure, the strong supportfrom donors and requested that the Secre-tariat write to all development partners thank-ing them for their assistance.

6.1.3 Review of Country Profiles

29. The Director reported on the progress ofthe review of the SOPAC country profiles, aspresented in paper AS33/6.1.3.

30. Council noted the progress with the re-view of the member-country profiles and re-quested the Secretariat secure funding on anongoing basis to complete revision of fourcountry profiles per year on a rolling basis, withprogress to be reported under the annual busi-ness plan.

6.1.4 SOPAC Work Programme and the MDGs

31. The Deputy Director presented paperAS33/6.1.4, updating Council on the activi-ties undertaken by the Secretariat in supportof the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),in particular the goal most relevant to SOPACactivities, MGD7.

32. Council heard of the significant effortrequired for reporting on international targets,given that availability of data on sectors likewater and energy in the region and withincountries was not as strong as it ought to be.Much work was being done by the CROP/UNMDG Working Group to set in place a mecha-nism whereby the information base for coun-tries and the region might be strengthened toensure that reporting obligations on interna-

16

tional targets do not become burdensome forthe Secretariat and for member countries.

33. Cook Islands expressed strong support forSOPAC assistance in reporting on progresswith MDGs which is currently being under-taken privately in the Cook Islands, urged theSecretariat to lend this support to membersas a national activity.

34. Council noted the contributions made bythe Secretariat for the regional report onMDGs and other international obligations rel-evant to SOPAC’s work, and participation inthe development of relevant indicators andtargets. Council further urged the Secretariatto continue to support members in their re-porting on MDGs and that these activities bereported in future under the relevant workprogrammes.

6.1.5 International Meeting on SIDS, Mauritius,January 2005

35. The Deputy Director presented paperAS33/6.1.5, the report to Council on Secre-tariat activities in support of members’ prepa-rations for the International Meeting on SIDS,to be held in Mauritius during 7-14 January2005.

36. Council was advised on the reasons be-hind the postponement of the Mauritius meet-ing to January 2005 from its originally-set dateof August 2004, and the other meetings andnegotiations that had transpired in prepara-tion for it.

37. New Zealand encouraged member coun-tries to see Mauritius as a milestone towardssustainable development, a beginning ratherthan an end of a process, and that they sawthe national sustainable development out-comes as a means for delivering benefits tothose on the ground.

38. Marshall Islands reported that the sameitem was discussed at the SPREP annual meet-ing and encouraged both SOPAC and SPREP tocontinue to assist member countries in prepa-ration towards the Mauritius meeting. He alsotook the opportunity to request the assistanceof the donor community, to enable membercountries to participate in the Mauritiusmeeting.

39. Council welcomed and encouraged thecontinuation of the Secretariat’s ongoing par-ticipation to support members in the prepara-tions/negotiations for the International Meet-ing on SIDS to be held in Mauritius, 10-14

January 2005, particularly through the PIFSMissions in New York.

6.1.6 Report on SOPAC Activities ConcerningClimate Change, Sea-Level Rise, Climate Variabil-ity and Extreme Weather Events

40. The Deputy Director presented paperAS33/6.1.6, citing these phenomena to be veryclose to the heart of what SOPAC is all about.

41. Council noted the obvious synergies ofthe sea-level rise and related phenomena withthe Ocean and Islands Programme and theSouth Pacific Sea Level and Climate Monitor-ing Project. Council further noted the meet-ings and contributions by the Secretariat toroundtable talks on the issues at hand; andits participation in ad hoc working group meet-ings.

42. In relation to the second phase of PIREP,Marshall Islands encouraged full cooperationand collaboration between SOPAC and SPREPwith the understanding that SOPAC is beingmandated and tasked with responsibility forrenewable energy, and SPREP for climatechange.

43. Tuvalu also suggested greater collabora-tion between the two organisations to ensuremore effective implementation of activities.It was also suggested that Council carefullyconsider the recommended name change toClimate Change, Sea Level Rise, Climate Vari-ability and Extreme Weather Events to ensurethat it does not limit potential opportunitiesfor funding or activities under the Kyoto Pro-tocol and UNFCCC and suggested that it wouldbe preferable to keep the original title of Cli-mate Change Framework.

44. Australia sought Council feedback onwhat key benefits the member countries seecoming from allocating further resources tothe feasibility for a Regional Financing Facil-ity for Adaptation given the limited discern-able returns so far on already expended re-sources.

45. Council shared the view that more workremains to be done on the concept of a Re-gional Financing Facility for Adaptation andencouraged the Secretariat to take an activerole in any future work to ensure that theanalysis and reporting on the original conceptbe completed.

46. SPREP reported that the proposed secondphase of Pacific Islands Renewable EnergyProject (PIREP), which is to be called the Pa-

17

cific Islands Greenhouse Gas Abatementthrough Renewable Energy Project(PIGGAREP), is a climate change project oftheirs and is a continuation of almost ten yearsof collaboration between UNDP, the GEF andSPREP on building the capacities of PICs to dealwith the challenges of climate change. SPREPfurther advised Council that it would continueto execute the current and next phase of theproject, in full consultation with the CROPEnergy Working Group, the project’s CountryTeams and the Roundtable on ClimateChange, Sea Level Rise and Climate Variabil-ity. This will also be done in accordance withthe advice SPREP has given on the project tothe FOC; the outcome of the multipartite re-view meeting for PIREP; and the endorsementgiven by the SPREP meeting. (The full text ofthe SPREP representative’s intervention is anattachment to the SPREP statement.)

47. Tonga recommended that SOPAC shouldcontinue to focus on energy issues.

48. The Secretariat welcomed the commentsfrom Council and it was noted that the regionalresponsibilities were clear for climate changeand for energy and that there was opportunityto strengthen and clarify partnership in theimplementation of PIREP Phase II on this ba-sis.

49. Council supported the inclusion of ex-treme weather events within any future workprogramme of the Climate Change Frame-work. Furthermore, Council agreed to supportthe name change of the framework to ClimateChange Framework, on the understandingthat this would include work on sea-level rise,climate variability and extreme weatherevents.

50. Council in considering the currentprogress with the review of the ClimateChange Framework encouraged the Secre-tariat to continue to actively participate andcontribute to the finalisation and endorse-ment of the revised framework through par-ticipating in future meetings of the Ad-HocWorking Group on Climate Change.

51. Council acknowledged the lead role thatSOPAC plays with respect to energy policy anddevelopment, and that other CROP agencieswere also undertaking work that linked tosome of these energy activities. Council urgeddonors and partners to support a collaborativeapproach among CROP agencies and otherinstitutions in the development and imple-mentation of energy programmes and projectswithin the region noting specifically that withregard to PIREP Phase II, SPREP has confirmed

that this is primarily a climate change projectand SOPAC will be engaged in the developmentand implementation of the project’s renewableenergy activities.

52. Council supported the Secretariat’s ef-forts in establishing and successfully promot-ing the energy and water Pacific PartnershipInitiatives and urged the Secretariat to ex-plore opportunities to secure additional newpartnership initiatives.

6.2 CROP Summary Report

53. The Director presented the SummaryRecord of the meeting of the Council of Re-gional Organisations of the Pacific (AS33/6.2),held in early July in Vanuatu, and attendedby all the Heads of the CROP organisations.

54. Samoa expressed concern at the numberof working groups the Secretariat was involvedin. Not wishing to undermine nor discredit thework of these working groups, Samoa’s con-cern was that resources used up in these work-ing groups might be detracting from meetingthe needs and requirements of the memberstates.

55. The PIFS representative added that thenew CROP charter had provisions for the chairof various CROP working groups to be rotatedamong CROP organisations and this could ex-acerbate the situation that concerned Samoa.

56. The Director, reassured Council that theSecretariat remained mindful of their obliga-tions to the member states and that it re-viewed carefully the purposes of workinggroups and that SOPAC participate only inthose working groups with strong links to theSOPAC Work Programme. The activities of aworking group were also, time-bound and taskoriented, and that the groups were dissolvedas soon as their tasks were completed.

57. Council noted the Summary Report of the2004 CROP Meeting, acknowledging thatitems of relevance to SOPAC would be raisedunder appropriate agenda items. Council fur-ther supported the Secretariat’s co-hosting the2005 CROP Meeting with the Fiji School ofMedicine.

6.3 STAR Chair’s Report

58. The STAR Chair addressed the jointCouncil/TAG session, and presented his re-port (AS33/6.3) on the 2004 STAR Session that

18

was held at the Warwick Hotel, Coral Coast,Fiji from 17 to– 19 September [see Appendix 5in this volume]. He began by providing a back-ground to the role of STAR for newcomers.

59. He also informed Council that the 21st

STAR Session (of 2004) was divided into threethemes –

1. Mineral policy, plate tectonics and off-shore mining.

2. Hazard assessment and risk manage-ment.

3. Water, sanitation and human settle-ment.

60. During the meeting fifty-four scientificpapers and two longer talks were presentedorally and twenty-six others displayed researchresults on posters. Abstracts of all papers arepublished in SOPAC Miscellaneous Report 576.

61. Furthermore, he highlighted a recurrenttheme of the STAR Sessions in the past fewyears, and that was the clearly applied direc-tion to much of the research results pre-sented, which ensured the provision of high-quality technical advice to member countries.

62. The STAR Chair was also impressed withthe large volumes of quantitative data that arebecoming rapidly available from a range ofmonitoring and remote sensing systems, rec-ognising that incorporating up-to-the-minuteinformation into research and policy would bea continuing challenge of the future.

63. In 2004, about half of the papers pre-sented at STAR were from scientists basedwithin the SOPAC region, the majority ofwhich was on Papua New Guinea, giving aglimpse of the fascinating geology of the hostcountry alluded to at the beginning by theChair of Council. Overall the STAR Chair ob-served genuine global research with a strongPacific base.

64. Council expressed its deep appreciationfor the report and guidance delivered by theSTAR Chair.

65. Papua New Guinea on behalf of the Tsu-nami Working Group requested that the TAG/Council recognise the need for assessingtechnical and monitoring needs for nationaland regional networks for tsunami warning.

66. Council adopted the STAR Chair’s reportand working group reports with their associ-ated recommendations.

6.4 SOPAC/EU Project Report

67. The Secretariat drew Council’s attentionto the significant size and cross-cutting na-ture of the EU-funded Vulnerability ReductionProject hosted at SOPAC; clearly evident in thevoluminous size of the summary (only) report-ing on the Project included in the meetingdocumentation. It was suggested to the meet-ing that to provide an effective report onprogress of work within the Project, that it bepresented within the programme reportingwhere the key results areas were bestaligned.

68. Council accepted that the reporting alongwith comments or input from TAG and STARwould be made accordingly under the threetechnical work programme agenda items.

7. OCEAN AND ISLANDS PROGRAMME

7.1 Report on the Ocean and Islands Programme

69. The Programme Manager Ocean and Is-lands, referred Council to papers AS33/7.1,AS33/7.2 and pages 16-25 of AS33/14.3, re-lating to the proposed Draft Work Plan andBudget for the Ocean and Islands Programmefor 2005.

70. The Secretariat outlined the structureof the presentation as comprising a brief over-view of the Ocean and Islands Programme, areview of work progress for the 2003-2004 re-porting period, a summary of emerging issuesfacing the programme for 2004 and beyond, andthe proposed work plan and budget for 2004-2005.

71. Council was reminded of the Pro-gramme’s goal and the three component ar-eas as outlined in the Ocean and Islands pro-gramme summary comprising Resource UseSolutions, Monitoring Physical and ChemicalChange in Ecosystems, and Ocean Governance.

72. The Secretariat reviewed the progressand achievements of the Ocean and IslandsProgramme by component and highlighted keyachievements:–

73. Under Resource Use Solutions a descrip-tion of progress on the following activities wasprovided: Phase II of Stage 2 of the Japan/SOPAC Cooperative Deep Sea Minerals Pro-gramme in the EEZ’s of Niue and Kiribati;technical reporting on resource assessmentsurveys in Marshall Islands and Federated

19

States of Micronesia; development of the Pa-cific Islands Regional Maritime BoundariesInformation System [PIRMBIS] with the re-cruitment of a dedicated officer on the project;transcription of geophysical data in the SOPACPetroleum Data Bank, particularly with datafrom Tonga; and capacity building under theCertificate in Earth Science and Marine Ge-ology Course.

74. For the Monitoring Physical and ChemicalChange component, the Secretariat describedprogress on the following activities: the deploy-ment of two oceanographic monitoring buoysin Penryhn and Manihiki Lagoons, Cook Is-lands, which provide near real-time collectionof oceanographic and meteorological data, anda cost-benefit analysis of technical interven-tions in Manihiki; the appointment of a Pa-cific Islands – Global Oceanographic Observa-tion Systems (PI-GOOS) Coordinator; an I-GOOS forum held in February 2004; the sur-vey of port areas, harbours and adjacent coastalareas of Rarotonga, Cook Islands; and main-tenance and calibration of SEAFRAME sitescompleted for all beneficiary States of theSouth Pacific Sea Level and Climate Monitor-ing Project, under Phase III.

75. For the Ocean Governance component, theSecretariat described progress on the devel-opment of the Marine Scientific ResearchCruise Co-ordination Database, with the in-put of Fiji data, and the convening of the Pa-cific Islands Regional Oceans Forum organ-ised by CROP at the Marine Studies Campusof the University of the South Pacific in Feb-ruary 2004 to develop an Integrated StrategicAction Framework for implementation of thePacific Islands Regional Ocean Policy.

76. The SOPAC/EU Project Leader, com-mented on the areas of the Ocean and IslandsProgramme relating to the SOPAC/EU Project,noting the major activities and tasks of theSOPAC/EU Project that link with the Oceanand Islands Programme, particularly in thesustainable development of coastal areasthrough the identification of alternativesources of aggregates. The Secretariat specifi-cally mentioned the appointment of staff to keypositions under this Project.

77. The following activities of the SOPAC/EU Project relating to the Ocean and IslandsProgramme were also mentioned: marine sur-vey work was completed around Tongatapu andNiuafo’ou islands (Tonga), around Savai’i andUpolu and within the Apolima Straits (Samoa),and in Tuvalu (currently underway); aggregate

surveys were completed in Tongatapu, in ad-dition to development of dredging guidelines;and an initial reconnaissance survey of ag-gregate resources in Ghizo (Solomon Islands).

7.2 Issues Arising in the Ocean and IslandsProgramme

78. The SOPAC Resource Economist gave anoverview of resource economics and the con-tribution that it can make to SOPAC throughapplication to the three SOPAC technical pro-grammes, to provide a context for Council. Shepointed out the importance of resource eco-nomics to connecting technical informationto positive economic net benefits, using theexample of a recent cost-benefit analysis ofproject interventions implemented to assistthe black pearl industry in Manihiki Lagoon,Cook Islands; stressing the need for effectiveimplementation of resource managementplans to ensure that outputs of project inter-ventions achieve their intended outcomes.

79. Other planned applications of resourceeconomics across SOPAC work programmesincluded: seabed mapping for aggregate assess-ments in the Marshall Islands; economic im-pact assessments of natural disasters; andcost-benefit analyses of Disaster Risk Mitiga-tion measures.

80. The Secretariat presented paper AS33/7.2 on the issues arising in the Ocean andIslands Programme.

81. The Secretariat sought Council’s consid-eration and guidance on the following issues:Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Policy; marinescientific research; mineral resources devel-opment; capacity building; maritime boundarydelimitation; South Pacific Sea Level and Cli-mate Monitoring Project; Programme re-sources; and ensuring effective outcomes.

82. The Secretariat outlined the proposedWork Programme for 2005, referring to AS33/14.3 pages 16-25, noting the change of word-ing from Ocean Governance to Natural ResourcesGovernance in the 2005 Programmes andStrategies document AS33/11.2.

83. Nautilus Minerals Limited commendedSOPAC for its work on improving the digitalMarine Scientific Research database, andraised the question on the availability of rocksamples from research cruises – as towhether SOPAC is considering establishing arepository for samples given that under

20

UNCLOS it is necessary that coastal Statesbe given samples for all MSR conducted in theirEEZs. He recommended that samples be keptin a common or regional repository, citing sev-eral examples of the loss of valuable samplesbased on current practice. The Nautilus rep-resentative suggested that the United Nationsenvironmental guidelines mentioned in 3.2.1,be treated with caution, as they were formu-lated without input from industry. He furtherstated that only Papua New Guinea and NewZealand had mineral policies enabling invest-ment; suggesting that member states considerthe New Zealand mineral policy as a model.Nautilus was of the opinion that the currentpractice of mineral assessments mostly un-dertaken by donor/aid programmes was un-sustainable.

84. The Secretariat responded indicatingthat the establishment of a regional reposi-tory would have significant resource implica-tions and would require direction from Coun-cil. It was also noted that most MSR had beenundertaken through bi-lateral agreements andcountries would have to determine how theywished to proceed. In terms of mineral policyinitiatives, the Secretariat mentioned thatthis was constrained by funding, but hoped toaddress these issues in the upcoming year.

85. The Marshall Islands expressed its ap-preciation for the work undertaken by SOPACand in particular the mapping efforts for al-ternative sources of aggregates in Majuro La-goon, and the identification of a sunken shipwhich has now become a tourist attraction.Marshall Islands requested that SOPAC lookinto the potential for mapping the whole ofMajuro Lagoon.

86. Tonga commended the Ocean and IslandsProgramme and EDF 8 work implemented inTonga and requested further training in theuse of the MapServer and GIS for their IT staff.Tonga also requested that the data acquiredunder the maritime boundaries delimitationproject be provided to Tonga to enable them tocarry out an independent assessment of thesedata, and begin processing their potentialclaim to an extended continental shelf beyond200 nautical miles.

87. The Intergovernmental OceanographicCommission commented on the importanceof the use of resource economics in SOPAC’swork programmes, highlighting how this workhas been extensively used in GOOS applica-tions in country activities. The IOC applaudedthe track taken by SOPAC and noted that itwas timely that SOPAC look at this issue. He

highlighted the work undertaken in the CookIslands which was the first activity imple-mented under the Pacific Islands GOOS, andnoted that SOPAC’s cost benefit analysisshowed the importance of improved manage-ment through data collection and monitoringto improve management decisions. The IOCinformed the Joint TAG/Council Session thatit is involved in helping Mauritius plan for theBPoA+10 and in promoting the importance ofthe work carried out in the region. The IOCsuggested that SOPAC explore the potential ofhaving a side-presentation at Mauritius com-bining the technical and cost-benefit analy-sis slants to the work, in order to highlightthe benefit of resource economics and its usein the Manihiki Lagoon, Cook Islands as anexample for SIDS. The IOC noted that thePerth office of GOOS would help support suchan initiative.

88. AMSAT highlighted their partnershipwith SOPAC in the South Pacific Sea Leveland Climate Monitoring Project. This pro-gramme was funded by Australia and has beenongoing since 2001. This Project is aimed atimproving the understanding of sea-level riseand climate change and involves membercountries, SOPAC, SPREP, PIF, USP,Geoscience Australia, CSIRO and Bureau ofMeteorology, Australia. AMSAT reiterated theimportance of the SeaFrame stations, whichhave been installed in several countries andnoted the STAR recommendation that consid-eration be given to SeaFrame as a potentialtool in tsunami monitoring. Advised data ar-chives are held at SOPAC, in-country and atthe Hawaii centre.

89. With regard to the request by Tonga fordata on maritime boundaries, the Secretariatresponded that SOPAC would be happy to pro-vide a full set of all information held by SOPACpertaining to Tonga. The Secretariat also ad-vised of the upcoming MarZone workshop,which provided countries with the opportunityto access data held under PIRMBIS. The Sec-retariat thanked the IOC for their offer to helppromote SOPAC outputs in relation to PI-GOOSat Mauritius in 2005.

90. USP commended the Certificate in EarthScience and Marine Geology Programme andinformed Council that it had been runningsince 1977. Through SOPAC’s continued sup-port this training programme has beenstrengthened and now contributes to a Uni-versity qualification. It was suggested that itmay be timely for Council and the Secretariatto review this programme to furtherstrengthen it for the benefit of members.

21

91. Papua New Guinea expressed its supportfor all seabed/resource-mapping activities,which is the responsibility of the Departmentof Geology and Mines. In responding to com-ments on rock samples Papua New Guineastressed that their Mining Act ensures thatall exploration samples collected must be pro-vided to the local geoscience survey reposi-tory. However as some samples require spe-cialist treatment, it encouraged the develop-ment of a close relationship with partners toensure the samples are analysed and all re-lated data provided.

92. Furthermore, Papua New Guinea indi-cated that during consultations within coun-try it had been agreed that consideration begiven to the holding of the proposed MarineBoundaries Workshop in Papua New Guinea.

93. Samoa sought feedback from the Secre-tariat on Samoa’s coastline data and mari-time delimitation base points. An indicationon the availability of results of the recentseabed mapping and coastal survey by KIGAMwas also requested. Samoa also inquired aboutthe possibility of SOPAC conducting a surveyfor a safe boat channel in the Aleipata areafor tourism purposes and advised that a pro-posal would be submitted to SOPAC.

94. Tuvalu extended their appreciation forthe survey currently being undertaken in-country. Tuvalu requested that a regional ca-pacity building programme to provide localtraining in the processing of data from theSouth Pacific Sea-Level Rise and ClimateMonitoring Project to ensure that countriesare able to utilise this information better.Tuvalu also mentioned that they have somequeries relating to maritime boundary data,particularly with respect to when validationof their full dataset would be available.

95. Vanuatu expressed its appreciation forall Ocean and Islands Programme work car-ried out, and went on to query what the re-source implications would be on membershipcontributions should a Minerals Adviser besecured.

96. Kiribati acknowledged the support of theSOPAC Ocean and Islands Programme, andqueried when Activities 1.2.3 (Assessmentand market study of Gypsum on an ongoingbasis for Kiribati), 1.2.5 (Establish and main-tain a regional deepsea mineral database),1.2.7 (Survey of remnant phosphate deposit onBanaba Island), 1.3.5 (Assessment of aggregateresources of North and Southeast Tarawa La-goon), 1.6.1 (Regional Maritime Boundaries

Project), and 2.3.2 (South Pacific Sea Level &Climate Monitoring Project) were to be carriedout.

97. Nautilus asked if costs were an issue forthe establishment of a regional repository forrock samples and if SOPAC would allow a pri-vate company to support such an initiative.He felt a central repository would be more ef-ficient, and help ongoing studies and knowl-edge development.

98. New Zealand commended the Secretariaton the use of resource economics in deter-mining the benefits of its projects. New Zea-land however queried whether the Secretariatused this approach in determining the use-fulness of the recommended additional staffresources, (such as the minerals adviser)mentioning that a business case for theseproposals would be strengthened by a cost-ben-efit analysis.

99. Tonga brought to the attention of Coun-cil that all information and data held for Tongaby SOPAC is still under the sovereignty ofTonga and is only held in trust by the Secre-tariat.

100. In response to comments by USP, theSecretariat agreed that it was indeed timelyto review the Certificate Course in Earth Sci-ence and Marine Geology given the need tosecure its long-term sustainability. The Sec-retariat also indicated that it had already pro-vided Samoa with maritime boundary datasetsand would be happy to follow up with identify-ing any gaps. For Tuvalu the maritime delimi-tation boundaries data was currently under-going independent quality review and the Sec-retariat would communicate all relevant in-formation to the Tuvalu authorities upon com-pletion of a review, and discuss future options.

101. The Director in response to Vanuatuadded that the securing of any additional staffwould require additional budgetary support. Infollowing up on New Zealand’s suggestion toutilise a cost-benefit analysis approach to pro-posals for recruitment of new positions, theSecretariat agreed to review these positions,and will endeavour in future meetings to pro-vide business cases to support requests foradditional resources. In response to NautilusMinerals Limited, SOPAC would support fund-ing from a private partner for a repository forMarine Scientific Research, but it was impor-tant to remember that in that case accesswould be open for all, and access outside of thecountry concerned needs the express permis-sion of the coastal state.

22

102. With regard to the numerous requestsfor additional work, the Deputy Director ad-vised Council on the existence of a buddy sys-tem that would be of assistance to countriestrying to address specific project related is-sues.

103. The BGS Advisor stressed to Council thatthe use of new technology in the acquisitionof data would give rise to issues of storage,management and access to this information,which will require increasing resources es-pecially personnel to process and manage thedata. It was suggested that this issue mightrequire the formulation of a working group ifit is to given due consideration.

104. JAMSTEC noted the change in the com-position of attendance and the smaller num-bers of Marine Scientific Research repre-sentatives. JAMSTEC indicated that samples/data collected in their surveys is freely avail-able as required by UNCLOS for marine sci-entific research. JAMSTEC also advised thatit is cooperating with USP and SOPAC in train-ing young scientists thus encouraging capac-ity development in interpretation and utilisa-tion of data for country’s benefit. JAMSTECrequested Council to continue its support forMarine Scientific Research. JAMSTEC alsoexpressed its concern for the loss of researchsamples they had provided to countries advis-ing adequate care in their maintenance.

105. Council further:

a. Acknowledged progress made on the finali-sation of the Pacific Island Regional OceanFramework – Integrated Strategic Action(PIROF-ISA), as part of efforts to implementthe Regional Ocean Policy and urged theSecretariat to be fully involved in the proc-ess towards implementation of aspects ofthe PIROF-ISA that are relevant to SOPAC’sWork Programme, and report on theprogress of implementation on an annualbasis.

b. Encouraged the Secretariat to explore fu-ture options with Japan for continued co-operation under the current, longstanding,important deep-sea resources research ini-tiative.

c. Strongly supported initiatives in regard tocoordination of Marine Scientific Researchand maintenance of relevant databases andnoted that additional financial resources

are required to recruit an advisor to fulfilthe roles and functions required.

d. Reaffirmed that mineral resource assess-ment remains a critical, integral part of theSOPAC Work Programme and urged theSecretariat to work closely with donor andother partners during the coming year tosecure funding for an Adviser (Mineral Re-sources), and put a business case togetherfor that position to take to Council at thenext SOPAC Annual Session.

e. Council reaffirmed its support for the Cer-tificate in Earth Science and Marine Geol-ogy course and for capacity building in earthscience within SOPAC and member coun-tries in general and urged the Secretariatto work closely with the CommonwealthSecretariat and other donors and partnersto locate a long-term sustainable fundingsource for such activities. It noted closelinks with USP and their support for suchactivities agreeing that a review of thecourse be undertaken.

f. Noted progress made to date on maritimeboundaries delimitation and PIRMBIS, aswell as on extended continental shelf is-sues and encouraged those members whohave the potential to submit claims for anextended continental shelf to remain mind-ful of the fast approaching timeline of 2009.

g. Encouraged the development of a capacitybuilding component in the fourth phase ofthe South Pacific Sea Level and ClimateChange Monitoring Project, with the aimof building the capacity of in-country ex-perts in data analysis and processing. Coun-cil further noted Australia’s offer to circu-late a strategy paper on the future PhaseIV to all participating countries and SOPACas soon as it is available from AMSAT.

h. Recognised the emerging importance ofresource economics in the monitoring,evaluation and cost-benefit analysis ofproject interventions toward more consid-ered decisions for the planning, develop-ment and management of their land andocean resources.

i. Approved programme management activi-ties toward strengthening the human andinstitutional resource requirements for ef-fective delivery of the Ocean and IslandsProgramme.

23

8. COMMUNITY LIFELINES PROGRAMME

8.1 Report on the Community LifelinesProgramme for 2004

106. The Secretariat introduced the Commu-nity Lifelines Programme outlining that thepresentation would have three parts, namely,Part 1 – Work Programme Reporting – 2004and overview of the Pacific Islands EnergyPolicy and Strategic Action Planning (PIEPSAP)Project, Part 2 – Issues Arising – 2004, andPart 3 – Work Programme and Budget 2005,where opportunities for discussion would beprovided at the end of each component withinPart 1 and following Parts 2 & 3. The Secre-tariat highlighted that in making the presen-tation the EU activities within the Commu-nity Lifelines Programme and the PIEPSAPProject would be presented by the respectiveTeam Leaders.

107. The Secretariat provided an overview ofthe Community Lifelines Programme, notingthe Goal of the programme to “Improve com-munity access to energy, water and sanita-tion, and information and communicationtechnologies for sustainable livelihoods”; thethree component areas Component 1 – Re-source Assessment, Development and Man-agement; Component 2 – Asset Management;and Component 3 – Advocacy and Governancewithin Community Lifelines; and the compo-sition of the Community Lifelines Programmestaff (22 in total) inclusive of the EU andPIEPSAP staff members.

108. The relevant papers and information forthis session were: Report on the CommunityLifelines Programme for 2004 Paper AS33/8.1;Issues Arising in the Community LifelinesProgramme Paper AS33/8.2; and Approval of2005 Work Plan and Budget Paper AS33/14.3(pages 26-44).

109. The Secretariat reported on the Pro-grammes activities for 2004, referring toCouncil Paper AS33/8.1, highlighting the keyactivities and achievements within the threecomponent areas including partners withinthese activities and acknowledged the vari-ous donor commitments and financial supportto the Programme from Australia, New Zea-land, France, Japan, Taiwan (ROC), UNEP,UNESCO, ESCAP, SIDA, DFID, ADB, WHO,World Bank and EU.

110. Component 1 – Resource Assessment,Development and Management, activities in-cluded the installation of a 20kW wind turbine

and associated wind energy education pro-gramme, biomass and ocean resource assess-ment; feasibility of coconut oil as a bio-fuel,ongoing publication of the Island Climate Up-date (ICU) bulletin, hydrological training, andthrough the EU, work on groundwater in Tonga,Vanuatu and Solomon Islands.

111. Component 2 – Asset Management, ac-tivities included development and construc-tion of a sanitation park, ICT support to PICsand Missions, and through the EU, setting upand establishing National Information Cen-tres, acquisition of satellite imagery and train-ing in GIS and remote sensing.

112. Component 3 – Advocacy and Governancewithin Community Lifelines, include regionalpolicies and strategic action plans, Pacificenergy/water partnership initiatives, CROPWorking Groups, climate change and adapta-tion, CSD, and education and training in wa-ter, energy and ICT. The Secretariat also pre-sented an overview of the Pacific Islands En-ergy Policy and Strategic Action Planning[PIEPSAP], with its objectives and activities,noting that it is an integral component of theCommunity Lifelines Programme, and that itis based on a menu of options that would pro-vide the flexibility to cater for individual coun-try requirements.

113. Geoscience Australia queried whetherSOPAC had a policy on spatial data infrastruc-ture (SDI), particularly given that GIS is in-creasingly being used throughout the region.

114. The Secretariat in noting the recommen-dation by a STAR Working Group that an SDIfor the region be developed indicated that adraft regional SDI would be developed as amodel for consideration by countries. The Sec-retariat further noted that the SOPAC inter-pretation of the Spatial Data Infrastructureeffectively mirrors the Island Systems Man-agement process and that the establishmentof any infrastructure is being carried out withtraining and capacity building to ensure ef-fective data management.

115. The Secretariat in response to the Solo-mon Islands query confirmed that theyplanned to install their MapServer early nextyear following the installation of MapServersin Tuvalu and Samoa, later this year.

116. Tonga congratulated the Secretariat onthe good work done in the area of ICT and ad-vised that they were ready for advanced train-ing in GIS and remote sensing and that thisbe prioritised.

24

117. Cook Islands thanked the Secretariat forthe paper and presentation and noted theirrequirement for training in the following ar-eas: image rectification, differential GIS, SDI,IT upgrading, tabular data; the need for satel-lite imagery for Aitutaki, further advising thatthe GIS and remote sensing training wouldsupport and assist with disaster managementand disaster recovery.

118. Kiribati congratulated the Secretariat forthe good work and training carried out in coun-try. He noted that several stakeholders wereunavailable for the initial training in Kiribatiand requested therefore, that further train-ing be provided where the preferred timingwould be October 2004.

119. The Federated Sates of Micronesia ac-knowledged the use of GIS as a tool for land-based management and suggested that as thegreater part of most countries are coasts andocean that the GIS tool also be used for coastaland lagoon management.

120. Tonga in response to the FederatedStates of Micronesia query confirmed thatthey were intending to produce power fromwind energy but were still exploring the po-tential of both wind and wave energy resourcesat this stage.

121. Samoa in support of the Programme en-couraged SOPAC and other CROP agencies tomake best use of the presence of the PIF Groupin New York as a means of assisting the Pa-cific in its advocacy to highlight regional is-sues globally including leveraging additionalresources for the region. Samoa in additionnoted the importance of the PDF-A project pro-posal for the “Integrated Water ResourcesManagement” and its endorsement and sub-mission to the GEF for funding consideration.

122. Samoa further requested that the Sec-retariat maintain communication with allstakeholders to ensure that all potential us-ers of the MapServers can effectively use thistool. Samoa further noted the need for sup-port in the hydrological sector, with regard towater supply leak detection, and noted theirinterest in the use of GIS and remote sensingfor the water utility. Samoa also queried if itwas possible to extend work on rainwater har-vesting options to the outer islands of Apolimaand Manono.

123. The Secretariat responded noting thatcountries have the prerogative to decide whereto locate the ICT infrastructure and that iden-tification of a country intern was a critical

component in the overall implementation ofthis component of the EU Programme.

124. Papua New Guinea, in noting that theyhad faced a similar problem to Samoa, in re-lation to the location of the MapServer, waspleased to confirm that the installation of theMapServer and appointment of an Intern hadsignificantly boosted SOPAC’s profile and de-livery under the project.

125. The Secretariat, in response to PapuaNew Guinea’s request for funding support fromSOPAC for furthering the earlier work in Lae,suggested that this be discussed as a workprogramme item.

126. The Secretariat, in response toVanuatu’s stated disappointment at not beinginvited to the Leadership Seminar for PacificIsland Water Managers held in Hawaii, con-firmed that the invitations were sent out di-rectly to utilities by the East-West Center. TheSecretariat further agreed that with futureinitiatives and partnerships of this nature thatthe Secretariat was aware of, country repre-sentatives would be informed about any suchworkshops or meetings.

127. Tuvalu in acknowledging the commence-ment of the PIEPSAP Project welcomed andencouraged the additional support that couldbe provided through the proposed menu of op-tions for the development of energy policy andstrategic action plans for countries. Further-more Tuvalu reminded the Secretariat of theneed to remain aware of the ongoing interna-tional work and negotiations on climatechange, in particular CDM, and that the Sec-retariat should collaborate with SPREP on cli-mate change issues relating to energy.

128. The Secretariat acknowledged the ra-tionale and desirability of establishing a co-operative, collaborative arrangement withSPREP and other relevant partners with re-spect to climate change issues so as to de-velop and establish synergies where possible.

129. Council accepted the report on the im-plementation of the 2004 Work Plan activitiesfor the Community Lifelines Programme.

130. Council acknowledged the progress madewith the integration of the energy, water andinformation and communication technologies.

131. Council accepted the input and com-ments from TAG and STAR Delegates withrespect to the content and delivery of the 2004Work Plan activities for the Community Life-lines Programme.

25

8.2 Issues Arising in the Community LifelinesProgramme

132. The Secretariat referring to Council Pa-per AS33/8.2 – Issues Arising in the Commu-nity Lifelines Programme highlighted to Coun-cil new and emerging issues that are of rel-evance to the Community Lifelines Pro-gramme. These being:

a. 4th World Water Forum, 2006 – Following thesuccess of the 3rd World Water Forum(3WWF) and the subsequent signing of aMemorandum of Understanding with theCaribbean Environmental Health Institute(CEHI) the Pacific region jointly concurredthat Caribbean should take the lead rolein the preparations for and in represent-ing the island states at the 4th World WaterForum. Participation from the Pacific willbe based on the need and determined closerto the Forum.

b. Commission on Sustainable Development– SOPAC, during 2004, continued to moni-tor and contribute through the New YorkMissions to the activities and debate on wa-ter, sanitation and hygiene. Specific noteshould be made of the United Nations “Wa-ter for Life Decade” (2005-2015) that willbuild on CSD12 & CSD13 with the objec-tive of meeting the MDG water and sanita-tion related targets, and CSD14 & CSD15(2006 and 2007) where the thematic clus-ter includes energy for sustainable devel-opment, industrial development, air-pollu-tion/atmosphere and climate change.

c. Pacific Partnership Initiatives – Include thefollowing: Pacific Islands Climate Update(ICU) Bulletin, Hydrological Training Work-shop, Sanitation Park Project, Pacific Is-lands Energy Policy and Strategic ActionPlanning (PIEPSAP) Project.

d. GEF Water Proposal – The development andsubmission of a PDF-A proposal to the Glo-bal Environment Facility for funding aproject on “Sustainable Water ResourcesManagement in Pacific Island Countries”.It is envisaged that this will lead to a full-sized project for Pacific Islands.

e. Pacific Islands Renewable Energy Project(PIREP) – Phase II – As follow up to the PIREPI Project is currently being designed. It isunderstood that the second phase, will,through the widespread and cost-effectiveuse of renewable energy resources and ap-plication of feasible renewable energy tech-nologies to reduce the growth rate of GHGemissions from fossil fuels.

f. CROP Energy Working Group (EWG) – SOPACcurrently adopts the position of Chair of theCROP-EWG and actively contributes to theworking group activities.

g. Pacific Islands Energy Policy and Plan(PIEPP) – Responsible for the coordinationof the review of the PIEPP.

h. Regional Energy Meeting 2004 (REM2004)– Noted the proposal to host the REM2004in November/December 2004 in Madang,Papua New Guinea.

i. Staff – Appointment of a Water Engineerthrough the Australian AVI programme, aProject Officer – Water Quality and a tem-porary graphic artist. Although the appoint-ments in the water sector address the im-mediate past issue of less than desirablestaffing levels there still remains the needto consider the requirements for thelonger-term.

133. Tonga sought clarification from the Sec-retariat on the recommendation seeking tostrengthen partnerships with the CaribbeanEnvironmental Health Institute with particu-lar reference to the 3WWF where benefits tothe Pacific from the association appeared tobe minimal and the potential domination ofthese initiatives by other partners at the ex-pense of the Pacific.

134. The Secretariat, in acknowledgingTonga’s concern agreed to be mindful of pastproblems and within their ability ensure Pa-cific visibility in the promotion of these ini-tiatives as well as protect the interests of thePacific.

135. The Republic of the Marshall Islands con-gratulated the Secretariat on the presenta-tion and expressed their appreciation for thework of the Community Lifelines Programmeand suggested to Council that any recommen-dations made by Council with respect to theproposed Phase II of the PIREP Project shouldreflect the need for collaboration between re-gional organisations and should recognise theresponsibility of SOPAC for regional energymatters and the responsibility of SPREP forclimate change matters.

136. Tonga also supported the view of the Re-public of the Marshall Islands and noted theneed to ensure that the wording of the recom-mendation did not suggest to donors that fundsshould be channelled into only one organisa-tion and recognised SOPAC’s primary respon-sibility in energy. Furthermore, Tongastressed the need for close collaboration be-

26

tween SOPAC and SPREP, as well as other part-ners.

137. SPREP reminded Council of their com-ments made in relation to the proposed PIREPPhase II under Agenda Item 6.1.6 and that therecommendations with respect to the PIREPProject should be consistent and if necessarycross-referenced.

138. Tuvalu noted their support for recom-mendations on the issues relating to the Com-mission on Sustainable Development and Pa-cific Partnerships.

139. Pacific Islands Forum Secretariatbrought to Council’s attention that PacificLeaders have continually encouraged regionalorganisations to work together resulting in theestablishment of CROP. In reaffirming thatSOPAC was the Chair of the CROP EnergyWorking Group, reinforced the need for allcountries to continue to reiterate the desir-ability for all regional organisations to collabo-rate.

140. New Zealand supported the recommen-dations as presented and noted that they con-sidered partnerships as important for invest-ment both within and outside the region withsupport aligned around Pacific regional strat-egies so as to achieve better harmonisationand maximise benefits. Furthermore, NewZealand expressed a desire to see workinggroups become more effective and the Secre-tariat to remain engaged.

141. The Secretariat responded to the inter-ventions made in relation to the proposed rec-ommendations contained in the paper on is-sues and provided acceptable modifications tothe meeting where the following recommen-dations were accepted as amended by Coun-cil:

a. Council, in recognising the benefits to itsMembers and the region from the Secre-tariat’s contribution to and participation inthe 3WWF, support the recommended ap-proach of the Secretariat in partnering withthe Caribbean Environmental Health Insti-tute (CEHI), with CEHI taking the lead withpreparations and promoting the islandcountries at the 4WWF in 2006. Further-more, Council supported the involvementof the Secretariat in the 4WWF proper, bear-ing in mind the need to ensure that theinterests of the Pacific islands countriesare protected in SIDS initiatives.

b. Council encouraged the Secretariat to con-tinue to engage in the follow-up activitiesof the WSSD through the CSD, and in par-

ticular those events that relate to energyand water, including the provision of adviceand guidance to the PIF Group in New Yorkduring 2005-2007.

c. Council commended the Secretariat on theprogress made in establishing projects un-der the Pacific Partnerships Initiative ofthe WSSD, and encouraged the Secretariatto be proactive in securing further partner-ships so as to strengthen and enhance theoverall programme delivery and support toits members, ensuring that members areinvited and can participate fully in newpartnerships.

d. Council endorsed the development of theproject on Sustainable Integrated Water Re-sources Management in Pacific IslandCountries and encouraged the Secretariatto facilitate its implementation through thePacific Missions in New York and GEF Na-tional Focal Points.

e. Council directed the Secretariat to remainactively engaged in the work of the CROPWorking Groups relevant to the core workprogramme areas of the Secretariat.

f. Council noted the opportunity tostrengthen the Secretariat’s capacity to de-liver on water related activities and urgedthe Secretariat to fill the Water Adviserposition in the EDF9 Project as soon as pos-sible whilst recognising that the EDF 8Project Senior Water Adviser is the ProjectManager. Council further acknowledgedthat the GEF Project on Sustainable Inte-grated Water Resources based upon theRegional Water Action Plan will also per-mit further enhancement of the Secretari-at’s capacity to support members on water-related issues.

g. Council noted and supported SOPAC’s pro-posal to convene a Regional Energy Meet-ing (REM2004) in December 2004 so as toprovide the opportunity for consultation onthe PIEPSAP Project; consult on the revisedPIEPP; present current, new and emergingregional energy programmes and projects,including PIREP – Phase II and the ESCAPTraining Needs Assessment Proposal; anddiscuss energy technological updates andfuture capacity building in renewable en-ergy technologies.

Work Plan & Budget 2005 – Community Life-lines Programme

142. The Secretariat referring to Council Pa-per AS33/14.4 (pages 26-44) outlined the keyactivities proposed for 2005 in the three com-

27

ponent areas of the Community Lifelines Pro-gramme and highlighted new and potentialactivities that included the following:

a. PIEPSAP – Policy & Strategic Action Plan-ning (3 years – $US1.8m – Danish/EU);

b. ADB support to the Pacific RAP and the Dia-logue on Water and Climate (~US$100k);

c. Taiwanese (ROC) support to the Water,Sanitation & Hygiene activities (~US$80k);

d. Sustainable Integrated Water ResourcesManagement – GEF (PDF – A&B) (US$15m);

e. GEF Project – Transportation Sector – GEF(PDF-A);

f. Resource Assessment – Biomass (FAO, Sa-moa); and

g. Regional Programme in GIS/RS support toUtilities ($$$).

143. American Samoa as Chair of the PacificWater Association brought to the attention ofCouncil that unaccounted-for-water is the big-gest obstacle to development and water man-agement. The PWA is looking forward to de-veloping a partnership with SOPAC and otherstakeholders through a programme that willensure that water utilities are able to addressthis issue and become more sustainable.

9. COMMUNITY RISK PROGRAMME

9.1 Report on the Community Risk Programmefor 2004

144. The Director introduced the ProgrammeManager for the Community Risk Programme;the Project Team Leader of the SOPAC/EUProject; and Dr Langi Kavaliku, leader of theHigh Level Advocacy Team for the CommunityRisk Programme.

145. The Secretariat referred Council to pa-pers AS33/9.1, AS33/9.2, the supplementarypaper attached to AS33/9.2 and pages 44-48of AS33/14.3, relating to the proposed DraftWork Plan and Budget for the Community RiskProgramme for 2005.

146. In providing an overview of progress for2004 the Secretariat first highlighted the pro-gramme goal and its components. The Secre-tariat reminded Council that the delivery ofCommunity Risk Programme activities is es-sentially built around strategic partnershipswith a range of organisations that have aninterest and commitment to engage in long-

term national capacity building in the Pacific.This means that the Community Risk Pro-gramme can manage the regional coordina-tion function with a small core group of tech-nical staff at the Secretariat and utilise themajority of available donor funds on capacitybuilding activities through the cost effectiveuse of partner organisations. The Secretariatnoted the addition of a new staff member tothe Community Risk Programme – NoudLeenders, Risk Analyst, funded by the DutchGovernment through UNDESA.

147. The Secretariat noted the challenge forthe Community Risk Programme with such alarge country membership to find an equita-ble balance in order to build capacity acrossthe region, and highlighted SOPAC’s responseto this challenge by developing regional ini-tiatives that can benefit all member countries.

148. The Secretariat went on to draw Coun-cil’s attention to several disaster events thathave occurred around the region includingCyclone Heta. These events reinforced theneed to build more resilient communities.

149. The key achievements made in thethree components of the Programme –strengthening resilience to disasters; mitigat-ing the effects of hazards; and mainstreamingrisk management were summarised and in-cluded the following:

a. Disaster risk management training –

• strengthening of the SOPAC partnershipwith The Asia Foundation/Office of U.S.Foreign Disaster Assistance (TAF/OFDA), and integration of the TAF/OFDAregional disaster risk managementtraining programme into SOPAC in 2004.

b. Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) –

• progress made with the EVI in expan-sion of the EVI database and a refinedEVI presented to the 10-review of theBarbados Programme of Action Prepara-tory Committee in New York in April2004.

c. Disaster Management Planning Guide –

• support of the New Zealand Ministry ofCivil Defence and Emergency Manage-ment with the development of a regionalframework for disaster managementplanning, which is currently a draft docu-ment that will be taken through exten-sive consultation with National Disas-ter Managers and trialled in selectedmember countries in 2005.

28

d. Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for aSafer World –

• review of the Yokohama Strategy andPlan of Action and the Preparations forthe Second World Conference on Disas-ter Reduction to be held in Kobe, Japanin January 2005, and acknowledged thesupport from Australia and New Zealandtoward this global initiative.

e. Partnership with USP –

• project funding provided by Australia fora SOPAC project in partnership with theUniversity of the South Pacific, to inves-tigate and report on the economic im-pact of natural disasters on developmentin the Pacific.

f. Draft Pacific Regional Position Paper forKobe –

• key areas of consideration for the re-gional action plan: governance; hazardidentification, assessment and monitor-ing and early warning systems; en-hanced knowledge management; riskreduction; and strengthening prepared-ness for effective response.

• The Secretariat thanked the Govern-ment of Papua New Guinea for allowingEric Ani, the NDMO Director, to carry theflag for all of the regional disaster man-agers throughout the InternationalStrategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR)discussions in Geneva leading up to theKobe Conference.

g. Disaster awareness –

• partnerships with the ISDR Secretariatin Geneva, Emergency ManagementAustralia and TAF/OFDA, in activelysupporting a range of public awarenessinitiatives.

h. Reviewing disaster management arrange-ments –

• strengthening of disaster managementarrangements with particular mentionof a review in Vanuatu, and plans forsimilar reviews in Niue and the CookIslands by the end of 2004, where possi-ble with partnerships with EMA fromAustralia, and the Ministry of Civil De-fence and Emergency Management NewZealand. The Secretariat encouragednational representatives to supportthese reviews, as they will provide abenchmark for future disaster risk man-

agement capacity building needs, andencourage relevant nationalstakeholders to participate on the re-view team in order to ensure a high de-gree of national ownership of the out-comes.

• currently four member countries are ei-ther receiving or about to receive sig-nificant support for national disaster riskmanagement related activities –Kiribati, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, andTonga. The Solomon Islands also has amajor capacity building project in thepipeline. The Secretariat indicated thatit will work closely with national projectsto ensure, where appropriate, they in-tegrate with agreed regional priorities,such as CHARM, the regional trainingprogramme and the regional action plan.

150. The Secretariat went on to outline keyactivities for the 2005 Proposed Work Plan andBudget and highlighted the importance of theupcoming 12th Pacific Regional Disaster Man-agers Meeting to be held in Lae, Papua NewGuinea, 7-9 June 2005. The Secretariat en-couraged donor colleagues to support selectedmember country representation to this impor-tant international conference.

151. Activities of the SOPAC/EU Project thatfell within the Community Risk Programmewere then summarised and included:

a. Research fellowships –

• research into hazards in Fiji; and

• coastal erosion, hazards and risks inKiribati (to 2006).

b. Support for training in landslide assess-ment.

c. Project risk assessment in Niue – docu-ment the impacts of Cyclone Heta, devel-opment of a model and assessment.

152. The Secretariat went on to present sev-eral cross-cutting issues of the SOPAC-EUProject that spanned all aspects of the SOPACwork programmes and addressed mainly thekey output areas of strengthening the capac-ity of ACP states. Key achievements included:

a. All national consultations were undertakenand work plans endorsed;

b. In-country consultations were also under-taken in Fiji;

c. In-country interns were identified and se-cured in 6 countries;

29

d. Regional equipment holdings – 6 global po-sitioning, computer hardware support forinterns;

e. Development of awareness material; and

f. Linkages between NSA, NGO and other or-ganisations have been made by the Project

153. The Secretariat then introduced Dr LangiKavaliku, the leader of the High Level Advo-cacy team.

154. Dr Kavaliku outlined some of the keyachievements his team had made in raisingthe profile of comprehensive hazard and riskmanagement (CHARM) in the Pacific. He ad-vised that the team has had mixed successfollowing consultation with 6 countries. Meet-ings with the Prime Ministers and Ministersfrom these countries have established gooddialogue. Several issues have arisen and in-clude the limits on country resources, multi-ple responsibilities and difficulties in accept-ing the new comprehensive approach of doingthings. Integration of the SOPAC work pro-grammes also needs strengthening, greatercollaborative efforts between CROP organisa-tions are needed and more knowledge of theresource economics of disasters is critical forthe future success of the advocacy team.

155. Dr Kavaliku appealed to donors to sup-port additional country participation at theupcoming global Disaster Reduction Confer-ence to be convened in Kobe. Papua NewGuinea and Fiji will be leading the Pacific teamto get recognition of Pacific issues. The pres-ence of other countries will help to visibly raisethe profile of Pacific issues. Dr Kavaliku onbehalf of the High Level Advocacy team andSOPAC expressed appreciation to all donorsincluding Australia, New Zealand and AsiaFoundation for their support.

156. Vanuatu acknowledged the support ofSOPAC and Australia in the establishment ofdisaster management infrastructure and theneed to maximise the benefits of this.Vanuatu stressed the need to address risksin Pacific Island countries because of theirsmall size, large surrounding ocean and iso-lation. It is in view of these that the Commu-nity Risk Programme plays an important rolein supporting countries efforts to achieve sus-tainable development. Vanuatu emphasisedthe need for countries to seriously considerthe disaster risk management approach be-ing advocated by SOPAC and ensure that thisprocess runs in parallel with other initiatives.

157. In reinforcing the importance and needfor training and capacity strengthening,

Vanuatu acknowledged SOPAC and TAF/OFDAtraining initiatives and urged for their con-tinuation and support. Focusing on the risksof tsunamis in the Pacific, Vanuatu urgedCouncil to consider recommendations to es-tablish a regional initiative to support earlywarning. Vanuatu also expressed the continu-ing need for the High Level Advocacy team,given the changing political climates, and toensure the fast track integration of CHARMin the region.

158. The Asia Foundation advised Councilthat in reviewing their training programmefor the Pacific the US Government has decidedto extend this programme for another 4 years.Programme funding channelled throughSOPAC will also provide support for the HighLevel Advocacy team.

159. Following discussions on the need forgreater collaboration SPC reminded Councilthat it is also active in the area of disastermitigation. SPC highlighted the cross-cuttingnature of disasters that impacted acrossboundaries demanding the need for more ef-fective collaboration among CROP technicalexperts.

160. PNG expressed their appreciation for theCommunity Risk Programme and encouragedSOPAC to continue to prioritise efforts to ad-dress the issue of tsunamis in the region. PNGalso expressed the need to utilise AMSAT tidaldata for tsunami warning systems and urgedthat this data be readily provided to countries.

161. Noting Council’s discussion on the im-portance of addressing the need for early warn-ings of potential tsunamis the UNESCO Tsu-nami programme advised Council of their ex-perience and capacity in this area and offeredto partner the region in their efforts to developa tsunami early warning capability.

162. Dr Kavaliku acknowledged the supportfrom the Asia Foundation for the High LevelAdvocacy team. He went on to reiterate theimportance of the upcoming global conferencein Kobe and the need for the Pacific to havegreater visibility at the conference to ensurethat Pacific issues are given appropriate con-sideration.

163. The Director advised Council that at therecent Heads of CROP meeting the issue ofthe need for greater regional organisation col-laboration was discussed (AS33/6.2 paragraph42). SOPAC Council recognised the CROPHeads resolution, “to better coordinate theirassistance to member countries in their im-mediate response activities to extreme natu-ral and human-induced events. Further, that

30

an early task of the new PIFS unit will be theimproved responsiveness of the CROP to suchextreme circumstances and acknowledge-ment of SOPAC’s role and responsibilities fordisaster risk management, which includespreparedness and mitigation aspects of suchevents.”

164. The Secretariat brought to Council’s at-tention the recommendations of the STARworking group on tsunami warnings and theneed for a regional tsunami warning centreand indicated that strong Council support forthis recommendation is noted. The Secre-tariat also recognised STAR comments andrecommendations and indicated that thesewill be factored into future Community RiskProgramme planning.

165. Niue expressed its appreciation for thedisaster assessment work undertaken bySOPAC following Cyclone Heta, which involveddocumentation of impacts and development ofa model. This model only covered part of thewest coast of Niue and requested if it is feasi-ble for SOPAC to extend this model to coverthe whole of the west coast of the island. Niuealso requested that the report be presented togovernment as soon as possible as some of thereports recommendations could be useful inthe reinstatement programmes underway.

166. The Secretariat responded indicating itwould be visiting Niue in two weeks and willendeavour to make the report available then.Also as the extension of the EU EDF 9 Projectincludes Niue, SOPAC will endeavour to in-corporate the extension of the model in theseactivities.

167. Tuvalu recognised the significantamount of work undertaken in the develop-ment of the EVI culminating in its presenta-tion at a meeting in New York chaired by HESopoanga, however, Tuvalu expressed signifi-cant concerns with the EVI. Advised that af-ter consultation with experts in Australia andNew Zealand, Tuvalu found there were seri-ous problems with rating all vulnerability in-dicators on the same scaling, as not all wereon the same scale of magnitude e.g. fertilis-ers and cyclones. He noted the problems withthe lack of data, some questionable calcula-tions of risk e.g. dry periods, scientific valid-ity of some indicators, e.g. biological isolationand the absence of critical indicators e.g. sea-level rise. Tuvalu noted that the EVI signifi-cantly downplays the risk for many Pacific Is-land countries and that this would have seri-ous implications for those seeking donor fund-ing for adaptation and risk management, e.g.

Niue rated 150 least vulnerable, whereas Sin-gapore rated the second most vulnerable. Be-cause of these serious implications, Tuvalusuggested that the EVI should not be presentedat the international meeting on the review ofthe Barbados Programme of Action in Janu-ary 2005. He suggested that SOPAC shouldrefocus the work of the EVI to becoming anevaluation tool for individual countries to as-sess their own risk based on their own scaleof vulnerabilities, and that a comparative nu-merical approach between countries was notappropriate.

168. The Federated States of Micronesia re-quested assistance from SOPAC with a base-line study for the development of an oil spillpollution contingency plan and procedures forremoval of wrecks as well as current shippingmovements. In response the Secretariat in-dicated that SPREP is responsible for address-ing this issue and they may wish to pursuethis matter directly with SPREP.

169. In response to comments by Tuvalu, theSecretariat highlighted that the developmentof EVI was initiated in response to calls madein the Barbados Programme of Action. In part-nership with New Zealand, United NationsEnvironment Programme, Ireland, Italy, Nor-way with Member countries have supportedthis work since 1998. The EVI represents thefirst attempt to develop such a tool and as suchis not perfect and is open to scientific critique.Advised that to obtain independent scientificreview and to ensure the best product possi-ble the Secretariat is convening an ExpertThink Tank in early October. The Secretariaturged that the information from Tuvalu’s ex-perts be made available to the EVI Think Tankor invited their participation at the upcomingThink Tank.

170. The Secretariat reported that there wasa positive response to the EVI when it was pre-sented in New York in April 2004.

171. As a partner in the development of theEVI, the University of the South Pacific high-lighted to Council the consultative processinvolving University scientists and studentsthat had been undertaken by SOPAC. USPunderscored the importance of the EVI and itsvalue as a first attempt to develop a tool forproviding guidance to countries on environ-mental vulnerability issues.

172. The Cook Islands supported the com-ments made by USP and registered their sup-port for the EVI, going on to indicate that theEVI is a valuable starting point and a usefultool.

31

173. Marshall Islands while expressing appre-ciation for the significant amount of workdone on the development of the EVI by theSecretariat indicated that Council should bemindful of the potential implications on donorfunding. Marshall Islands acknowledged theneed to continue to move forward with thisactivity and encouraged further work on theEVI for regional usage. Papua New Guineasupported this comment and suggested Coun-cil take note of Tuvalu’s concerns.

174. In supporting the EVI, Fiji acknowledgedthe importance of the EVI development proc-ess and its usefulness as a management toolfor country use. Fiji was mindful of the out-standing work still to be carried out and theneed for continuing support to do this.

175. Tuvalu indicated to Council that it sup-ported the use of the EVI as a national tool. Itwent on to suggest that each country neededto refine the EVI to focus on their particularvulnerabilities rather than it being used as atool for comparison between countries.

176. The Secretariat agreed that the strengthof the EVI is in national application and en-couraged countries to refine the tool to suittheir own circumstances. The Secretariatwent on to indicate that having a common EVIframework is also useful and this does notconstrain a country’s ability to customise theEVI for their own purposes.

177. NIWA suggested to Council that they maywish to recommend that the upcoming EVIThink Tank consider what is presented atMauritius and that it may be useful to onlypresent examples of the EVI rather than acountry ranking.

178. Council accepted the report on the 2004Work Plan for the Community Risk Pro-gramme, with some reconsideration of workwith respect to the EVI.

9.2 Issues Arising in the Community RiskProgramme

179. New Zealand sought clarification fromthe Secretariat on which plan was referred toin recommendation 6 before Council. NewZealand also requested feedback from Coun-cil as to what Council members felt were go-ing to be the expected outcomes from Kobe andwhether additional benefits could be achievedby either individual representation or asmaller group attendance at Kobe.

180. Tonga and Vanuatu indicated that theysupported individual representation at Kobe.

181. Australia informed Council that bothAustralia and New Zealand had received re-quests from SOPAC to fund regional participa-tion at the Kobe conference. However, in thisrequest it was not clear what this representa-tion would be and whether a preference wasfor particular countries or individuals. Aus-tralia therefore sought from Council whethercountries need to be individually representedor if a group could be mandated to representthe region.

182. Federated States of Micronesia indicatedthat it is likely the country will send their owndelegation.

183. The Secretariat responded to New Zea-land and highlighted that the Kobe meetingdoes not exist in its own right and is only astep on the road to where the region wants togo. Countries can respond individually on whattheir expected outcomes of the Kobe meetingmay be, however, it was expected that the realoutcomes of the meeting would be realisedafter the meeting. The objectives and expectedoutcomes are embedded in the Draft PacificRegional Position Paper, which was preparedin June in consultation with national disas-ter managers and other stakeholders. It isexpected that these long-term outcomes willbe realised through finalisation of the PacificRegional Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduc-tion 2005-2015.

184. Australia sought clarification from theSecretariat as to the expected participation atthe upcoming 12th Pacific Regional DisasterManagers Meeting to be convened in PapuaNew Guinea. The Secretariat responded indi-cating that it will be actively promoting thismeeting and it is expected to be well attendedand to receive strong political support.

185. Council endorsed the Draft Regional Po-sition Paper for the Second World Conferenceon Disaster Reduction, and following the KobeConference for this document to be finalisedas the Pacific Regional Action Plan for Disas-ter Reduction 2005-2015 for consideration bythe 12th Pacific Regional Disaster ManagersMeeting in Lae, Papua New Guinea in June2005 and progress to be reported to Council atits next meeting.

186. The Cook Islands indicated that the out-comes of Kobe would empower NDMOs aroundthe Pacific and provide them with a mecha-nism for reducing vulnerability.

32

187. Council noted the action taken on theoutstanding issues from the 2003 meetingrecord.

188. Council supported the shift of focus bythe Secretariat from the development of a draftregional policy for communities at risk to aregional action plan for disaster risk reduc-tion.

189. Council strongly urged Members to ac-tively participate in the Second World Confer-ence for Disaster Reduction to be held in Kobe,Japan, 18-22 January 2005 in order to seeksupport for the region’s needs and encourageddonors to support the Secretariat’s requestsfor funding in order to facilitate and coordi-nate this participation.

190. Council encouraged the Secretariat torefocus its work on the EVI towards assistingindividual countries to assess their ownvulnerabilities without arriving at an indexfor comparative purposes among countries.Council suggested that this refocusing workbe completed before the EVI is presented atany future international meetings.

191. Council noted the improved CommunityRisk Programme management arrangementsand welcomed the development of new part-nership initiatives as well as the developmentof the Integrated Risk Reduction PlanningGuide.

192. Council supported the application of theDisaster Management Planning Guide throughNational Disaster Committees and Councilprovided support to CHARM national traininginitiatives.

193. Council endorsed the Community RiskProgramme support to National Disaster RiskManagement Projects to ensure consistencywith agreed regional priorities.

194. Council endorsed the full commitmentof the Secretariat to the coordination and or-ganisation of the 12th Pacific Regional Disas-ter Managers Meeting, and expressed thanksto the Papua New Guinea Government for of-fering to host this important regional activityin 2005.

195. Council endorsed the Draft Pacific Re-gional Position Paper for the Second WorldConference on Disaster Reduction, and follow-ing the Conference for this document to befinalised as the Pacific Regional Action Planfor Disaster Risk Reduction 2005-2015 for con-sideration by the 12th Pacific Regional Disas-ter Managers Meeting in Lae, Papua New

Guinea in June 2005, and progress to be re-ported to Council at its next meeting.

10. PROGRAMME REVIEW MONITORING ANDEVALUATION

196. The Director presented paper AS33/10and its supplementary which followed up onthe procedures agreed to by Council at theSOPAC 32nd Session in Niue last year for ap-pointing Technical Advisory Group and STARscientists who could participate in providingindependent and unbiased evaluation of thepast and future work programmes of the SOPACSecretariat. The paper provided backgroundinformation to assist Council in appointing the2005 programme monitoring and evaluationgroups (PMEGs) for the technical work pro-grammes; and the supplementary paper pre-sented the nominees to the three programmemonitoring and evaluation groups as compiledby the STAR Chair in conjunction with theSecretariat Director, as per Council’s instruc-tion in 2003.

197. With a number of member country rep-resentatives at this Council meeting unfamil-iar with the Council decision in Niue regard-ing the PMEGs, a number of points of clarifi-cation were necessary to update them on thereasons for the cost implications (aboutF$10,000 per PMEG); the inspiration behindthe idea, which was the re-engagement of theSTAR and TAG scientists in meaningful dia-logue on the SOPAC Work Programme; and thescope of work that was envisaged for thePMEGs which was to evaluate for Council theSecretariat’s implementation of the previousyear’s work programme and to consider whatwas planned for the following year.

198. Australia welcomed the concept of anindependent evaluation of the SOPAC WorkProgramme and asked if a terms of referenceexisted for the work that the PMEGs were sup-posed to do.

199. New Zealand, echoed Australia’s ques-tion on a PMEG terms of reference, furtherquerying whether in-country assessmentswere also to be undertaken and the level ofPMEG involvement in them.

200. Papua New Guinea reminded Council oftheir view expressed last year on the PMEGs’cost implications that would be a constrainton the SOPAC budget and expressed the hopethat SOPAC remained focussed.

33

201. Marshall Islands was mindful of the con-cern expressed in an earlier agenda item bySamoa that the additional work not divert stafftime from the implementation of the SOPACWork Programme.

202. Samoa noting the budgetary implicationsof the PMEG concept wondered whether Coun-cil was expected to approve all nominationsas presented, or whether the PMEG nomina-tions would be limited to three per team.

203. The Secretariat brought Council mem-bers up to date on the decision and proceduresagreed to in Niue last year, where the budgetallocation in the 2005 Budget was to cover thetravel and per diem of PMEG members whileat the Secretariat, and that there was no allo-cation for fees which was in accordance withthe STAR Chair’s assurances in Niue thatSTAR scientists would provide their time serv-ing on PMEGs, gratis.

204. Council also heard that it was anticipatedthat after a trial period, the PMEG processwould lead to a more informed and robust de-bate than has been apparent at recent JointCouncil/TAG meetings, whilst at the sametime fulfilling an independent monitoring andevaluation role for the delivery on SOPAC’swork programmes. The Secretariat was of theview that this process can only be good forSOPAC.

205. The Secretariat acknowledged Council’sconcern on the absence of a clear terms ofreference for the work of PMEGs, and offeredthat the terms of reference used by the moni-toring and evaluation team that worked onreviewing project initiatives of the former Dis-aster Management Unit of the Secretariat,would be a satisfactory starting point for build-ing up a ToR for the PMEGs.

206. Tonga expressed the view that the costimplication was a big one and he felt thatPMEGs were only going to be doing what theSOPAC Directorate should be doing.

207. The Director reassured the meeting thatthe Directorate was in no way trying to ab-solve itself of their rightful responsibilities ofoversight of the implementation of the SOPACWork Programme, but that it was for the goodof the organization and there was a need tore-engage the STAR and TAG scientists inwork programming as they were an importantaspect of SOPAC. The PMEGs were expectedto independently qualify the SOPAC Work Pro-gramme and report to Council in Session as away of verifying whether the Secretariat’s

work was scientifically and technically cred-ible, and it was felt that Council might derivea degree of comfort from this independent valu-ation of work carried out on their behalf. Ad-vised that the Secretariat has always foundthe professional interaction with STAR scien-tists within and out of session as extremelyvaluable for carrying out work in membercountries.

208. Council then heard a submission fromthe STAR Chair on the role of the STAR andTAG scientists that was enshrined in theSOPAC Constitution, and the group’s growingdiscontent that there wasn’t proper opportu-nity for them to provide appropriate input thatthey had come to SOPAC meetings for. He feltthat the symbiosis between the STAR scien-tist and Council was a good one and needed tobe preserved, and his own work as STAR Chairwould be less onerous if other STAR scientistswere given the opportunity to study the workprogrammes on the approaches to the annualmeetings rather than the presently rushedmanner in the margins of SOPAC Councilmeeting.

209. Council heard a further submission fromthe BGS advisor, reinforcing the STAR Chair’scomments, adding that though STAR scien-tists have generally funded their own way toSOPAC meetings for the “public good”, but thatit was now becoming increasingly difficult forsome of them. The advisor considered it theirprofessional duty to contribute their knowl-edge to SOPAC, given that the Pacific has beena huge and complex laboratory in which manyof them grew up practising their science.

210. In response to Kiribati’s question onwhether the cost implications would affectmember-country contributions, the Secre-tariat replied that based on the 2005 alloca-tions, there were none, but that should costsin future become exorbitant, then the Secre-tariat will certainly explore other avenues forraising the necessary funds.

211. Fiji expressed support for the PMEG con-cept, admitting that they generally did not havethe time to evaluate work programme papersbefore leaving to attend SOPAC Council meet-ings and Fiji would certainly derive comfortfrom having the PMEG provide them with anindependent evaluation.

212. Marshall Islands observed that new ideasalways generate more questions needing an-swers but he was confident that the conceptwas for the good of the SOPAC and lent it hissupport.

34

213. Cook Islands recapped on the discussion,reminding Council that it had given the PMEGconcept the green light last year, and that theonly problem left was to resolve what theywere to do and he urged the Secretariat toexpedite the crafting of a suitable terms ofreference for circulation to Council members.On whether the PMEG may encroach on Coun-cil’s responsibilities; he pointed out that heas a member of Council was comfortable inthe knowledge that he was in the driver’s seatof the organization and reminded his fellowCouncil members that they were in same po-sition as he. He was completely confident thatthe PMEG was good for SOPAC.

214. Having reassured themselves that de-spite the cost implication the exercise wasonly for the good of SOPAC, and that it wouldoffer Council members some degree of com-fort that there was an independent and unbi-ased evaluation of the organisation’s past andfuture work programmes being carried out ontheir behalf; Council endorsed the member-ship of the PMEGs for 2005 and gratefully ac-knowledged STAR scientists’ willingness toparticipate, noting that each PMEG will in-clude no more than three persons.

215. Furthermore Council looked forward toreceiving PMEG reports at the 2005 AnnualSession, noting that each PMEG team wouldappoint its own Convenor. The agreed compo-sition of the PMEGs for 2005 will be drawn fromthe following nominees:

a. Ocean and Islands Programme –

• David Tappin (British Geological Survey)

• Garry Greene (Moss Landing MarineLaboratory US)

• Joe Buleka (Geological Survey of PNG)

• William Erb (UNESCO/IOC Perth Office)

• David Garton (Georgia Tech)

b. Community Lifelines Programme –

• Sam Taufao (SPC, Noumea)

• Kifle Kahsai (USP)

• Andrew Matthews (NIWA, New Zealand)

• Utu Abe Malae (American Samoa Devel-opment Bank)

c. Community Risk Programme

• Joanne Laurence (EMA, Australia)

• Wally Johnson (Geoscience Australia)

• Stan Goosby (Pacific Disaster Centre, US)

• Hugh Cowan (IGNS, New Zealand)

d. In addition ex-officio members of each ofthe PMEGs would be:

• Chair of STAR, (Professor John Collen,VUW, NZ)

• Director/Deputy Director (Secretariat)

216. Council noted, with appreciation, theSTAR and TAG scientists’ offer to provide thetime they will spend on serving on thesePMEGs, gratis.

217. The Chair expressed the gratitude ofCouncil to the STAR scientists for their con-tributions to the Joint Council/TAG Sessionof the SOPAC 33rd Session and wished them asafe journey home; a sentiment that was ech-oed by acclamation from the rest of Council.

GOVERNING COUNCILPOLICY SESSION

11. DIRECTOR’S ANNUAL REPORT

11.1 Introduction

218. The Director presented her report tocouncil under Agenda AS33/11.1. She notedthat the technical work programming issueswere covered during the last two days at thejoint TAG/Council Session.

219. She highlighted that the Corporate Planand Work Programme Strategies provided theSecretariat with the strategic directions forthe organisation in the longer term, whilst theaccompanying Business Plan, responded tothe Corporate Plan and Programme Strategies,as part of its operational framework over ashorter time period.

220. In addition, the meeting noted that theannual Business Plan was a barometer togauge the overall performance of the Directo-rate, both in terms of technical work pro-gramme delivery and the strategic manage-ment of the Secretariat. A paper had been cir-culated to Council representatives, whichhighlighted the Secretariat’s ability to deliveron the work programmes.

221. The Director further highlighted Secre-tariat work undertaken at the corporate levelthat included the review of the SOPAC Inte-grated Corporate Risk Management pro-gramme; the performance management sys-tem for staff, which are linked to the pro-

35

gramme outputs; the reviews of the guidelinesfor ICT, Library and Publications; and the Fi-nancial Regulations. She also highlighted thatCouncil needed to consider the draft Corpo-rate Plan and Programme Strategies for 2005to 2009.

222. Council was assured that the Secretariatwas committed to visiting all membership be-fore the next annual session.

223. The Director reported to Council that theExecutive Management Team (EMT) heldregular meetings during the year to monitorand evaluate the Secretariat’s day-to-day op-erational performance.

224. She noted that the PMEG mechanismagreed to by Council would provide SOPACmembers with a level of comfort and confi-dence on the quality of performance in rela-tion to the Secretariat’s work programme de-livery.

225. She also highlighted the need for regionalcollaboration amongst CROP organisations andnon-government organisations to achieve re-gional priorities, including the Pacific Plan,as well as collaborative efforts to engage at theglobal level with regard to WSSD partnershipsand through the CSD, the Mauritius Meeting,and the 2nd World Conference on Disaster RiskReduction.

226. She also drew attention to two priorityactions under the 2004 Business Plan, whichincluded the need to develop a robust commu-nications strategy and plan for the Secre-tariat; and the protection and valuing of hu-man capital through the human resourcesmanagement system.

227. The Director reminded Council that theSecretariat has emerged from a transitionalphase into an established programme envi-ronment, and assured Council that the Sec-retariat is mindful of its responsibilities to themembership.

228. She concluded her introductory com-ments and pointed out that her progress re-port was against the 2004 Business Plan forthe Directorate.

11.2 SOPAC 2005-2009 SOPAC Corporate Planand Programme Strategies

229. The Director introduced paper AS33/11.2, the draft 2005-2009 SOPAC CorporatePlan and Programme and Strategies, for Coun-cil consideration.

230. Council was provided with some back-ground on the review of the 2002-2004 Corpo-rate Plan, which had been conducted by anindependent consultant engaged by the Sec-retariat. The review was led by the consult-ant in discussion with member countries, theSecretariat and other partners. The reviewpresented to SOPAC contained nine recom-mendations. The Secretariat reviewed thisreport and provided comments on relevant rec-ommendations for Council consideration.

231. The nine recommendations highlightedin the consultant’s report included sugges-tions that a plan with a five-year life expect-ancy be produced; that the Corporate Plan beamalgamated with the Programme Strategieswith a smaller fact sheet produced to summa-rise the merged documents. The considera-tion for the improvement of the performanceindicators for the programme strategies, in-cluding a statement of progress against thehigher-level objectives were also suggested inthe consultant’s report.

232. The Director highlighted to Council thatthe recommendation relating to the annualBusiness Plan suggested that it was not a keyplanning document for the membership, how-ever, it was an important record card for theDirectorate, to assess the operational perform-ance. She assured Council that the Directo-rate would in future continue to liaise withthe Chair to discuss the progress and perform-ance of the Secretariat against the annualbusiness plan.

233. Council noted that the only change wasto rename the Corporate Services Programmeto Corporate Services due to its service/sup-port nature rather than as a technical pro-gramme.

234. The SOPAC Director presented a briefsummary of the draft 2005-2009 CorporatePlan and Programme Strategies to Council.She articulated the four strategic directionsas outlined in the draft 2005-2009 CorporatePlan and Programme Strategies: SustainClear Comparative Technical Advantage, In-stitute Good Corporate Governance, DevelopEffective Strategic Management, and SupportSustainable Development in Pacific IslandsCountries. Council also noted that the SOPACkey work programmes have direct links to thestrategic directions and the overall vision.

235. The Director highlighted that the SOPACwork programmes each have three componentareas and various outputs to be deliveredagainst the purpose. She noted that the keyindicators against the outputs have been de-

36

termined for the period 2005-2009, with out-comes to be realised by 2009. She emphasisedthat the Secretariat would need to deliveragainst the outputs, whilst the Secretariat inpartnership with Council would ensure thedelivery of outcomes. She provided an exam-ple of the application of resource economics,that was presented at the STAR Session, toillustrate the difference between the Secre-tariat’s delivery of SOPAC outputs; as opposedto the higher-level outcome that could only berealised with member countries’ commitmentand was beyond the Secretariat’s control.

236. Council noted cross-cutting elements ofcapacity building, governance and advocacy;priority setting, outcomes and outputs andmeans of delivery; and the reporting, moni-toring and evaluation mechanism.

237. Cook Islands thanked the Secretariat forthe review of the Corporate Plan. In support-ing the recommendations as presented in thepaper the Cook Islands went on to reinforcethe role of the Council and its importance inguiding the way forward and directing the Sec-retariat.

238. Australia commended the Secretariat onwhat was an evident collaborative effort to pro-duce a revised draft and the reporting on workprogramme against indicators. In addition,change was suggested for the title, in light ofthe amalgamated Corporate Plan and Pro-grammes Strategies documents.

239. In expressing their support for the rec-ommendations, the Marshall Islands ex-pressed its appreciation to the Secretariat forresponding to Council’s request to review theCorporate Plan. Papua New Guinea shared thesentiments of other Council Members.

240. The Director welcomed the encouragingcomments from Council. The Secretariat in-dicated that the title for the document shouldreflect both its corporate and delivery dimen-sions and reminded Council that it is a docu-ment for the whole organisation.

241. New Zealand commended the Secretariatfor its work in reviewing the Plan, but sug-gested that review processes need more in-volvement. New Zealand encouraged countriesto participate in the PMEGs as well as inde-pendently monitor and evaluate the effective-ness of SOPAC’s work in their respective coun-tries. New Zealand also sought clarification onhow the new combined Corporate Plan andProgramme Strategies document would affectthe Business Plan – would the Business Plan

be presented to Council or is it a Plan preparedin consultation with the Chair?

242. The Secretariat responded that the Busi-ness Plan is the corporate operational planlinking the Corporate Plan and Strategies toannual corporate and technical work pro-gramme delivery. As this was an operationalplan it is expected that the most efficientmechanism for its preparation is in consulta-tion with the Chair, with the Director’s An-nual Report including progress against this.

243. Australia suggested that the title shouldreflect the plan’s primary strategies. In sup-port of comments made by New Zealand onPMEG, Australia reinforced the need for in-volvement of member states to ensure thatthe Secretariat is contributing to outcomesand sustainable development in countries.

244. The Director suggested the title for thedocument be “Corporate and Programme Strat-egies”.

245. Tonga supported Australia’s suggestionfor a title change and suggested “The SOPACRoadmap”.

246. Cook Islands did not have a problem withany title, recognising that what was importantwas the effective delivery of services.

247. Council welcomed the positive review ofthe progress with implementation of the Cor-porate Plan for 2002-2004, and supported theSecretariat’s responses to the review recom-mendations, as reflected in the 2005-2009SOPAC Corporate Plan and Programme Strat-egies.

248. Council noted that the annual BusinessPlan reporting on the Corporate Plan will becommunicated, as agreed, by the Director tothe Chair, prior to each Annual Session, withcopies made available to the membership onrequest.

249. Council accepted the simplified title“SOPAC Strategic Plan” and endorsed the‘2005-2009 SOPAC Corporate and ProgrammeStrategies’.

11.3 Leader’s Pacific Plan

250. The Director introduced paper AS33/11.3and its supplement; providing some back-ground information to the papers. Council wasreminded of comments made by the SecretaryGeneral of the Pacific Island Forum Secre-

37

tariat that there would be actions and deci-sions in this plan that would be of direct rel-evance to SOPAC.

251. Marshall Islands expressed its support forthe continuing involvement of the Secretariatin the development of the Pacific Plan.

252. Tuvalu also supported the continuinginvolvement of SOPAC however requested thatSOPAC ensure that all aspects of climatechange, climate variability, sea-level rise forwhich SOPAC has responsibility is reflectedin the Plan.

253. New Zealand thanked the Secretariat forits explanation on the Secretariat involvementand requested the Secretariat provide somegeneral comments on the Pacific Plan.

254. Samoa in welcoming the Leaders’ initia-tive agreed that the Plan would contribute toshaping the region’s long-term future, andconveyed its full support for engagement in theprocess. Samoa further reinforced a statementmade by the Forum Secretary General on own-ership of the Plan which Samoa felt should bea product of in-depth and wide consultationsright from the initial stages of its designthrough to implementation. Samoa felt theaspect of ‘ownership’ was a vital one and mustbe followed through to ensure that the Plansucceeded in achieving real and long-termsustainable outcomes.

255. Papua New Guinea also supportedSOPAC’s involvement in this important re-gional initiative. Papua New Guinea went onto note that any associated costs should beincluded in the 2005 Work Plan and Budget.

256. Australia also lent their support forSOPAC’s ongoing participation in the develop-ment of the Pacific Plan as it was consideredessential that not only countries but regionalrepresentative’s also participate. SOPAC’s in-volvement would also help to ensure practicalresults for the countries.

257. The Marshall Islands requested the Sec-retariat to continue to advise members of theirongoing involvement and advise of outcomesfrom this process.

258. The Pacific Islands Forum Secretariatinformed Council of the sector analysis thatwas being developed on the Pacific Plan. Hesuggested that Council may wish to considerthis and ensure that issues arising from agaps analysis are fed back to the Pacific Is-lands Forum Secretariat.

259. On security issues within the PacificPlan, Tuvalu encouraged SOPAC to emphasisethe vulnerability of Pacific Island countrieswith respect to climate change and other haz-ards.

260. Tonga supported the view expressed byTuvalu, but stressed the need to also accountfor grassroots views and not just consult withmember countries.

261. SPREP congratulated the Chair on hiselection and also passed on good wishes to theDirector. SPREP went on to inform Council thatthe SPREP Governing Council also consideredthis agenda item and similar issues wereraised that focused on ownership and involve-ment by the community. SPREP acknowledgedthe involvement of the SOPAC Deputy Direc-tor in the preparation of the Pacific Plan, cit-ing it as an excellent example of CROP col-laboration. SPREP went on to commend thePacific Plan to Council, acknowledging it asthe first comprehensive plan to address theneeds of the region.

262. In responding to comments made byTuvalu, the Secretariat indicated that themain responsibility of SOPAC in the issue ofclimate change was adaptation and SOPAC,in partnership with SPREP, who has primaryresponsibility for climate change, was to en-sure Tuvalu’s concerns as well as all otherimportant issues are reflected in the Plan.

263. The Secretariat went on to provide Coun-cil with an overview of the Plan highlightingthe four basic themes – economic growth, sus-tainable development, governance and secu-rity. The Pacific Plan needed to be developedwithin a sustainable development framework,and SOPAC expected the themes of govern-ance and security to be cross-cutting and thatthe outcome of addressing these would be eco-nomic growth. It was in this context, particu-larly, that SOPAC will have a key role.

264. Advised that the work required of thetaskforce in developing the Pacific Plan wasenormous, however, a lot of work had alreadybeen done in the region in preparation for theWorld Summit on Sustainable Development,Barbados Programme of Action+10 and the 2nd

World Conference on Disaster Reduction. Itwas expected that outcomes from these globalinitiatives would have regional implications.The region also had established and approvedregional policies and plans. This regional plan-ning documentation will provide a basis for theamalgamation and rationalisation into a stra-

38

tegic framework for the regional plan. How-ever, the real challenge would be to find a prac-tical and more efficient way of working. Issuessuch as collaboration and consultation are keyand that a communication strategy is criticalfor the development and implementation of thePlan. Ownership by countries and the regionof the Pacific Plan was essential as it wouldbe the guiding document for the next tenyears.

265. The Secretariat suggested to Council thatthe results of the sector analysis could be madeavailable and concurred with the Pacific Is-lands Forum Secretariat in requesting coun-tries for feedback on gaps. The taskforce is tomeet at the end of October and has agreed tofollow up on the gaps analysis.

266. Council noted the developments withregard to the Leaders’ Pacific Plan and directedthe Secretariat to participate over the com-ing year as may be requested by the Secre-tary General in the work of the task force toensure SOPAC’s contribution to the develop-ment of, and role in, the implementation ofthe Pacific Plan is optimised.

12. FINANCIAL REPORTS

267. The Deputy Director introduced the Man-ager Corporate Services and informed Coun-cil that the Secretariat’s reporting of the au-dited financial statements would be by excep-tion, rather than a detailed presentation,given the voluminous nature of documentsbefore Council.

12.1 Financial Report 2003

12.1.1 2003 Audited Financial Statements,Auditors Report and Management Report

268. The Secretariat proceeded with the re-porting beginning with paper AS33/12.1.1,suggesting to Council that a reduced versionof the Audited Financial Statements be pre-sented to Council in future rather than thefull version, to cut down on the volume of pa-per currently being presented (e.g. the 2004statements are about 200 pages).

269. The Secretariat also explained that areview of the Financial Regulations wasunderway and would address a number of is-sues that included the reporting format.

270. While acknowledging the review of theFinancial Regulations, New Zealand hoped thereview would take into account the treatmentof Fixed Assets; a concern shared by the CookIslands. The Secretariat responded in the af-firmative.

271. In response to a request by Tonga forsurplus equipment, the Secretariat explainedthat board of surveys were done on an annualbasis and that if there was surplus equipment,Tonga’s request may be entertained, althoughthe Secretariat acknowledged that generallysurplus or written-off equipment was usuallyobsolete and unusable and was reluctant todump them on member states.

272. Council noted and accepted the 2003Audited Financial Statements, Auditor’s Re-port and Auditor’s Management Letter; andagreed to a truncated, and well summarisedpresentation of the audited accounts, providedthe full version continued to be available tomembers on request.

12.1.2 Report on 2003 Regular Budget Varianceand Virement of Funds

273. The Secretariat presented Paper AS33/12.1.2.

274. Council noted and accepted the Reporton the 2003 Budget Variance and Virement offunds.

12.1.3 Report on Assets and Inventory writtenoff for the year ended 31 December 2003

275. The Secretariat introduced the paper anddrew Council’s attention to a couple of correc-tions to the attachment – the market valuesand amounts received for the Asset ID num-bers 980024 and 990012 should read as zero.

276. In response to the Kiribati query on thecurrent procedures for writing off assets andwhether Council’s endorsement was required;the Secretariat responded that write offs wereonly done if assets were either beyond repairor obsolete and that the write offs were ap-proved by the Directorate.

277. The Republic of Marshall Islands soughtclarification on the great number of assets thatwere shown as ‘damaged by lightening’. TheSecretariat explained that they had all beendamaged by one particularly severe event but

39

that these assets could be replaced becausethey were insured. Fiji confirmed they hadindeed suffered similar damage from the samestrike but that their equipment was, unfortu-nately, uninsured.

278. Council accepted the report on assetsand inventory written off for the year ended31st December 2003.

12.2 Report on 2004 Accounts to 30 June

12.2.1 Financial Accounts for the 6-month periodto June 2004

279. The Secretariat introduced paper AS33/12.2.1, advising Council that these accountswere not audited and that the explanatorynotes were based on exception reporting.

280. Council noted and accepted the report onthe 2004 Accounts to 30 June.

12.2.2 Membership Contributions

281. The Secretariat introduced paper AS33/12.2.2 and the supplementary paper that wasbeing circulated at the beginning of the pres-entation of the agenda item that updated theStatus of Membership Contributions, giventhat the paper before Council gave the updateas at 30 June.

282. New Zealand drew Council’s attention tothe recommendation by the Auditors wherebyguidelines be developed on ways to deal withthe membership contributions in arrears; andthat this be covered in the review of Finan-cial Regulations.

283. Marshall Islands encouraged the Secre-tariat to continue liasing with member coun-tries with arrears to make necessary effort tomeet their excess contribution.

284. Those member countries most seriouslyaffected by this setback, reassured Council oftheir sincere commitment to honouring theirobligations to the SOPAC Council and the Sec-retariat was urged to continue with the nec-essary follow up with these members.

285. The Secretariat informed Council thatit had received positive feedback from thosemember countries with arrears.

286. Cook Islands echoed New Zealand’s com-ments on the development of the guidelinesand hoped that the review of the Financial

Regulations would be done promptly so thatCouncil could comment on the review beforethe next Annual Session. Cook Islands alsowelcomed Guam back into the fold, noting thatit had been some time since they attended anannual session.

287. Samoa urged member countries withoutstanding arrears to settle their debts asthis affected the organisation’s cash flow andcould in turn affect the delivery of the WorkProgramme.

288. Palau asked to be informed about the cri-terion that was being used to assess the con-tributions.

289. The Secretariat explained that they usedthe same formula as that of the Pacific IslandsForum whereby there were 3 categories of fullmembership. SOPAC had a fourth categoryAssociate Membership. The Secretariat alsodrew Council’s attention to Table 4 of PaperAS33/14.3, showing the categories and thepercentages used.

290. Council received the status of the mem-bership contributions report; and the assur-ances of those within their midst that werecommitted to honouring their obligations toSOPAC.

13. ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

13.1 Rules of Procedure for ExecutiveAppointments

291. After an informal exchange of views forwhich no record was taken, Council agreedthat henceforth, the Deputy Director be ap-pointed by the Director in close consultationwith a Council-approved subcommittee. Coun-cil then considered and agreed to new Rulesof Procedure for Director Appointment andRules of Procedure for Deputy Director Appoint-ment and these are included as appendices tothe Proceedings of the 33rd Session (this vol-ume).

13.2 Deputy Director Position

292. The Director presented paper AS33/13.2,and informed Council that the current incum-bent’s first term as Deputy Director expiresin March 2005.

293. Council reviewed and approved the jobdescription, terms and conditions of employ-

40

ment and job advertisement, for the DeputyDirector position, as contained in the “Infor-mation Package for Deputy Director Appoint-ment”, attached to the paper. The Chair calledfor nominations for the Deputy Director Ap-pointments Subcommittee with the under-standing that the constituency of the sub com-mitted would be open-ended. The agreed ini-tial Deputy Director Appointments Sub-com-mittee to assist the Director will be: New Zea-land, Federated States of Micronesia, CookIslands and Papua New Guinea.

294. The Director expressed hope that oncemembers committed to being on the Appoint-ments Sub-Committee they would commit toit for the entire process for consistency’s sake.

295. Council also noted that in order to allowa smooth transition into the new arrangementthe Director is likely to utilise an interim ar-rangement.

13.3 SOPAC Staff Remuneration – CROPRemuneration Review Report

296. The Deputy Director presented paperAS33/13.3, providing Council with an overviewof the CROP process to harmonise remunera-tion. This review process had been underwayfor the last few years, culminating in the CROPRemuneration Review Report.

297. The Secretariat referred to the attach-ment to paper AS33/13.3 with its sixteen rec-ommendations, which went to the Forum Of-ficials Committee in Apia.

298. The Secretariat reminded Council thatit was seeking endorsement of recommenda-tions 1-14, and noted that the Working Grouphad further work to do in consideration of edu-cation and housing allowances, and hoped tobring this issue to close by the Budget FOC.

299. The Secretariat referred Council to theAttachment, describing the principles of har-monisation, and commended the text to Coun-cil for consideration.

300. The Secretariat highlighted some as-pects from the document, including:

a. The salaries of SOPAC support staff werefound to lie within the upper quartile of theFiji market, and therefore no recommen-dation for change to support staff salary wasmade.

b. The implications on the SOPAC budget ofan annual salary rise of 4 % as stimulated

by the Australian Public Service have ledto the decoupling of SOPAC professionalsalaries from the APS market.

c. The recommendation to introduce SpecialDrawing Rights (SDR) as a buffer for sala-ries against exchange rate fluctuations re-stricted to within ± 5 % of the original sal-ary value.

d. The recommendation that three referencemarkets should be used to track CROPsalaries on an annual basis: Australia, NewZealand and Fiji.

e. Staff regulation 13e, which states that afixed term appointment of three years isrenewable, but when any professional staffhas served in the same position for a con-tinuous period of six years, it shall be man-datory for that position to be re-advertised.

301. New Zealand requested that recommen-dation 2, be amended by the addition at theend of the paragraph of the phrase “includingthe use of exit surveys”, to reflect the highturnover in CROP agencies, which makes staffretention a poor indicator of job satisfaction.New Zealand informed Council that the CROPHarmonisation Working Group had concludedthat an important element of the collection ofstaff retention data in future would be the useof exit surveys, which would give a more ac-curate picture of the reasons for staff leaving.

302. Cook Islands registered its support andendorsement of the recommendations andapproved New Zealand’s suggestion for exitsurveys. Cook Islands suggested that furtherwork was needed with regard to education andhousing allowances.

303. Marshall Islands expressed gratitude forthe work of the Secretariat and New Zealandwith regard to the remuneration review.Marshall Islands reminded Council that fur-ther work was needed on the issues that re-mained unresolved and supported the recom-mendations.

304. Samoa expressed its support of the FOCdecision and that it should be adopted. Samoafurthermore commented that whilst it appre-ciated the difficulty at times to secure replace-ment for a professional technical position withSOPAC, due largely to the specialised andhighly technical nature of the post, it was onlyunder these special circumstances that anincumbent should be re-appointed after hav-ing already served two, three-year terms withSOPAC. Samoa further elaborated that undersuch special circumstances, if an exception

41

is given, it should be granted for only 3 yearsand not another 6 years. Furthermore, Samoareferred to the SOPAC Staff Regulations, whichwould need to be revised accordingly to accu-rately reflect SOPAC’s policy on the extensionof its personnel beyond 6 years.

305. Kiribati supported all the recommenda-tions, and that the issue of housing and edu-cation allowance for professional staff be givenfurther consultation by the Working Group.Kiribati requested that housing for professionalstaff be linked to the post, rather than thecountry from which the incumbent originated.

306. Tuvalu supported the recommendations,particularly decoupling the link for SOPACsalaries from the Australian Public Service,and the use of the Australian, New Zealandand Fiji markets, and setting a ceiling and floorfor Special Drawing Rights.

307. Tuvalu cautioned that the six-year ruleexceptions for highly-specialised staff couldlead to certain staff becoming ”indispensable”to SOPAC, which is undesirable. Tuvalu en-couraged SOPAC to further engage in the har-monisation process.

308. Papua New Guinea expressed their gen-eral support for all recommendations. PapuaNew Guinea suggested that junior staff fortechnical positions ‘under-study’ their seniorswith a view to assuming the post in lateryears, on expiry of contracts under the six-yearrule, to enable capacity to be built in special-ist technical areas. Papua New Guinea fur-ther expressed their desire that housing andeducation allowances should be attached topositions, rather than where the incumbentis recruited from.

309. With reference to the interventions onthe six-year rule, New Zealand noted that theFOC Harmonisation Working Group would bereconvening on 5 October to consider a rec-ommendation to the Budget FOC on implemen-tation of the rule. It invited countries withparticular views on the issue that could notparticipate in this Suva-based meeting, to con-vey these directly to New Zealand as Chair.

310. The Secretariat noted paragraph 2 of thetext on harmonisation, highlighting that eachCROP agency choose a particular strategy thatsuited its own organisation, but must reporton deviations from CROP common practice.The Secretariat therefore requested a clearindication from member countries with regardto this issue.

311. The Marshall Islands advised Councilthat countries should also remember that this

initiative was tasked to the FOC and there-fore Countries can also take their concernsdirectly to FOC or to the Chairman of the Re-view Committee.

312. Council endorsed recommendations 1-14 of the CROP Harmonisation Working Groupnoting that in regard to housing and educa-tional allowances for professional staff, furtherwork was needed.

313. In so doing, Council approved:

a. The salary scales for professional and sup-port staff for 2005 (Attachment 2).

b. The Secretariat participate fully in the re-convened CROP Remuneration WorkingGroup to: (i) explore options for cost shar-ing among CROP; (ii) conduct an annualreview and analysis of the data received forthe reference markets and present theanalysis and recommendations’ and (iii)compile and analyse staff recruitment, andretention information across CROP on anannual basis, with exit surveys

c. That the Secretariat engage in future de-liberations with regard to the Housing andEducation Allowances for professional staff.

d. The 6-year rule for professional staff posi-tions continue to apply as in the Staff Regu-lation 13(e), and Council will consider thisissue again following FOC’s further work.

e. That the approved recommendations of theWorking Group Report and the CROP Har-monisation and Remuneration GuidingPrinciples and Strategies be included in anAnnex to the Staff Regulations.

13.4 Reappointment of Contract Staff since 32nd

Annual Session

314. The Secretariat, in accordance with StaffRegulation 13e, reported on two professionalstaff positions for which Secretariat staff werereappointed beyond a six-year contract:Makereta Kaurasi-Manueli as Accountant andRobert Smith as Senior Adviser- Marine Geo-physics.

315. The Marshall Islands expressed its sup-port for the recommendation.

316. Papua New Guinea noted its acceptanceof the recommendation and went on to makean observation that the composition of theSecretariat staff still did not reflect the mem-bership. Papua New Guinea suggested that thiscould be addressed with the wider advertise-

42

ment of available positions in all SOPAC Mem-ber Countries.

317. Australia commented on the report pro-vided to Council and suggested that informa-tion such as marital status should be ex-cluded.

318. Marshall Islands suggested to the Sec-retariat that any upcoming position advertise-ments should be circulated to SOPAC NationalRepresentatives in all member countries andthat they be responsible for advertising.

319. Tonga expressed some concern on thecriteria used to select staff, particularly inrelation to junior staff. Tonga went on to re-quest for a look at ways to better involve andprovide opportunities to member country jun-ior professionals.

320. The Secretariat advised Council that theSOPAC staff list is included in Annex 1 AS33/14.3. The Secretariat indicated that the staffcomposition does not fully reflect its member-ship but the Secretariat does employ severalprofessionals from around the region. In pro-moting greater Pacific professional develop-ment the EU Project is establishing countryinterns in all participating countries with theexpectation that these staff will spend time atthe Secretariat and work with Project profes-sional staff. SOPAC continues to explore otherways and opportunities to support professionaldevelopment of member country personnel.

321. The Secretariat reminded Council thatprevious decisions by Council accepted thatpublication of SOPAC positions at nationallevel was a national responsibility. The re-sponsibility of the Secretariat, was agreed tobe at the level of Internet and regional publi-cations, and distribution to National Repre-sentatives.

322. Cook Islands concurred with the com-ments expressed by member countries andsentiments raised by Tonga and Papua NewGuinea. The Cook Islands indicated that thiswas an ongoing issue and he was extremelypleased to note that, despite the slow progress,the Secretariat continues to address this is-sue as effectively as possible and the recentappointment of a Cook Island national to theSecretariat was cited as a case in point.

323. Council noted the reappointment ofMakereta Kaurasi-Manueli as Accountant andRobert Smith as Senior Adviser, Marine Geo-physics.

13.5 Secretariat Integrated Corporate RiskManagement Plan

324. The Director introduced paper AS33/13.5.

325. Council was reminded that the Inte-grated Corporate Risk Management Plan hadbeen endorsed at the 32nd Annual session ofGoverning Council and that the intention ofthe paper currently before Council was to pro-vide it with a level of confidence that, throughthe Directorate, its Secretariat had identified,assessed and, are managing its priority risks.Council was also made aware that this wouldin future be reported under the annual Busi-ness Plan.

326. Nauru questioned the security of thebuilding complex and site where the Secre-tariat was located and whether this was en-compassed in the risk management plan.

327. At the suggestion by the Republic ofMarshall Islands, Council was briefed by Fijion the Pacific Village. Fiji informed Councilthat all the completed paperwork for the Pa-cific Village complex was with the Ministry ofFinance for approval. He envisaged that fi-nance clearance of all the paperwork wouldbe completed by year-end. The projected costfor the construction of the Pacific Village isFJ$45 million.

328. Marshall Islands expressed gratitude forthe development of a comprehensive plan andsought the meeting’s views on considering itas a living document and its potential to beused as a model for the region.

329. The Secretariat noted the interventionsby the membership and the Director that therisk management plan was indeed a livingdocument, that it be annually assessed andupdated and reported on under the AnnualBusiness Plan.

330. Council reviewed the Integrated Corpo-rate Risk Management report and urged theSecretariat to implement the suggested riskimprovement actions for the following prior-ity risks: Disaster Recovery & Business Con-tinuity, Risk Financing, Membership Contri-butions, Security of Premises, Secretariat’sStaff Interests, Emergency Evacuation, FireProtection, Data Backup and Security of In-formation Technology.

43

13.6 Review of ICT, Library and PublicationsGuidelines

331. The Secretariat provided Council with anupdate on the review of the Secretariat ICT,Library and Publications Guidelines, and notedthe Guidelines attached to AS33/13.6. Thereview of the ICT, Library and Publishing proc-esses at the Secretariat had been listed asan activity of the Business Plan for the pasttwo years. It was completed during the pastyear. The Secretariat also highlighted that theguidelines are mainly for internal use andthat the Secretariat continues to adhere tobest practice.

332. Marshall Islands expressed gratitude tothe Secretariat for its ICT, Library and Publi-cations services, and supported endorsementof the recommendation.

333. Tuvalu thanked the Secretariat for itsassistance in ICT and the Federated States ofMicronesia along with Vanuatu expressedsimilar sentiments.

334. USP thanked SOPAC for the extensiveuse of the SOPAC library by staff and studentsof the University. USP reminded professionalstaff of all CROP agencies that they had recip-rocal rights to the University library with itsextensive Pacific Collection.

335. Council noted the revised ICT, Libraryand Publications Guidelines.

13.7 Review of Financial Regulations

336. The Secretariat presented paper AS33/13.7, advising Council on the Terms of Refer-ence for an external review of the FinancialRegulations and the documentation of the fi-nancial operations and processes.

337. The Secretariat noted that the review ofthe Financial Regulations, which is over tenyears old, had been listed as an activity of theBusiness Plan for the past two years. The Sec-retariat mentioned that the external auditorsin their Audit Closing Reports highlighted theneed to amend the Financial Regulation 17b(relating to the acquisition of fixed assets), asit did not comply with international account-ing standards. The Secretariat outlined plansto incorporate procedures for reporting toCouncil, and matters relating to insurance,equipment, staff, infrastructure, public liabil-ity, contracts and tender into the revised Fi-nancial Regulations.

338. In response to Tuvalu’s request for theTerms of Reference for the review, which hepointed out was not attached to paper AS33/13.7; the Secretariat reported that the audi-tors had been tasked with drawing up a de-tailed Terms of Reference, which would com-ply with international and Fiji accountingstandards.

339. Australia suggested that the language ofthe recommendation in the paper be changedto reflect Council endorsement of the reviewrather than the Terms of Reference.

340. Marshall Islands sought the advice of theSecretariat on whether it would be possible tocirculate the Terms of Reference documentto member countries before the next AnnualSession.

341. The Secretariat clarified that the Termsof Reference would be developed as soon aspossible, and circulated for comment and re-sponse out of Session, so as to allow the re-view of Financial Regulations to be completedin time for reporting back to the 2005 Councilmeeting.

342. Council endorsed a review of the Finan-cial Regulations and that a detailed Terms ofReference be developed as soon as possible,circulated to members for comment, that areview be carried out during 2005, and thereview report together with the recommendedrevised Financial Regulations and supportingProcedures Manual be submitted to the nextSession.

14. 2004 WORK PROGRAMME AND BUDGET

14.1 Reserve Fund Ceiling

343. The Secretariat presented paper AS33/14.1 as a reporting requirement by Council toannually review the ceiling on the ReserveFund. The Secretariat advised Council thatafter taking into consideration the assump-tion and based on the 30 June 2004 Accounts,that it would cost F$261,480 to close the Sec-retariat, should it cease operations. Based onthis and after taking into consideration Coun-cil’s decision at its last meeting, it recom-mended that the Reserve Fund Ceiling remainat F$400,000.

344. Cook Islands commented that this wasan issue, which had been discussed at sev-eral Annual Sessions. Cook Islands furtherstated that the Reserve Fund Ceiling level

44

should remain at $400,000 given that it wasunlikely that the Secretariat would ceaseoperations.

345. Nauru sought clarifications as towhether the unspent funds under Regular andExtra Budgets would remain with the Secre-tariat, should it cease operations. The Secre-tariat responded that this would only occur ifdonors gave their approval.

346. The Republic of Marshall Islands en-quired as to the application of the interest onunspent funds. The Secretariat pointed outthat this interest was ploughed back into thecore Budget and indicated where in the 2005Work Plan and Budget income derived frominvested funds was accounted for.

347. The Council agreed that the ReserveFund Ceiling remain at F$400,000.

14.2 Appointment of Auditor

348. The Secretariat presented paper AS33/14.2 on the appointment of the auditor for the2004 and 2005 SOPAC financial statements,as a requirement under the Financial Regu-lations. The Secretariat advised Council thatthe three Suva-based international auditingfirms were invited to tender for the audit andbased on this tender process, recommendedthat the current auditors, Ernst & Young, beappointed to carry out the audits of the 2004and 2005 SOPAC financial statements.

349. The Council assessed the audit tendersand concurred with the Secretariat recom-mendation, approving the appointment of Ernst& Young to audit the SOPAC 2004 and 2005financial statements.

14.3 Approval of 2005 Work Plan and Budget

350. The Deputy Director presented paperAS33/14.3 and summarised the work planprocess and dialogue which took place prior topreparation of the 2005 Draft Work Plan andBudget. The Deputy Director also referred tothe presentations by Programme Managersearlier in the meeting, which provided an over-view of the work carried out by the respectivework programmes.

351. New Zealand, whilst appreciative of thework done by the Secretariat to reduce theunsecured funds (or over programming) to anoverall 15% of the 2005 Draft Work Plan andBudget, sought clarifications on how the Sec-

retariat would fund these activities and madeparticular reference to the high level of unse-cured funds in the Community Lifelines Pro-gramme. New Zealand also expressed concernon the use of New Zealand extra budgetaryfunds for Corporate Services. She consideredtheir membership contributions enough in-put into that area. Her preference was for NewZealand extra budgetary funds to be utilisedfor programme delivery.

352. The Secretariat explained that over pro-gramming was deliberate to allow it flexibilityin delivering other programmes (shown asunfunded activities in the budget) where pro-grammed/funded activities are unable to becarried out, e.g., a marine survey suspendedindefinitely, due to vessel unavailability, aswas recently experienced at the Secretariat.

353. On the matter of New Zealand funds be-ing used for direct programme activities, theSecretariat would take that on board andmake the necessary changes after furtherconsultations with New Zealand.

354. Palau sought clarification on the issueof the membership contributions’ categories– as to which small island states qualified ascategory 3 members. The Secretariat re-sponded that those countries categorised assmaller island states would qualify as category3 members.

355. Tonga sought clarification from the Sec-retariat on the Kiribati bilateral funds shownin Table 6 of AS33/14.3 as anticipated sourceof funds. He wondered how these funds werereceived by the Secretariat as well as whetherthe total budget is reflective of cash funds onlyor did it include in-kind contributions. Tongaalso enquired as to what percentage of the to-tal budget was spent on salaries.

356. The Secretariat explained that theKiribati bilateral funding was for a specificactivity in Banaba, which is being funded bythe French Government. The funding is bothcash and in-kind and is the prerogative ofKiribati, how it is expended, following the workdone by the Secretariat. On the issue of thepercentage of the salaries, the Secretariatresponded that distribution of resources isshown in Table 5 of the paper and the sala-ries account for 41 % of the total budget.

357. Nauru sought clarification on the ‘un-known’ under the anticipated sources of fundson Table 6. The Secretariat advised Councilthat this was the unsecured portion of thebudget.

45

358. The Republic of the Marshall Islands ex-pressed its appreciation for the work done andcommented that the presentations earlier bythe respective programme managers provideda clear overview on the work being done. Healso stated that he went along with the rec-ommendations and requested that the Secre-tariat continue to look for funds for the unse-cured activities.

359. Kiribati concurred with the explanationprovided by the Secretariat on Tonga’s ques-tion regarding the issue of the Kiribati bilat-eral funds.

360. On the issue of the bilateral funds, Tongaexplained that he was seeking clarificationson the mechanism for transfer of bilateralfunds as they have potential bilateral projectswith the Secretariat for which they will needto transfer funds. The Secretariat explainedthat the process involved would really dependon what the donor required and was not surewhat the World Bank procedures were regard-ing subcontracted bilateral assistance, forTonga’s case.

361. The Secretariat also advised that in fu-ture, they would separate the over-program-ming activities from the activities with se-cured funding to further increase the trans-parency of the budget.

362. Council approved the 2004 RevisedBudget of F$11,300,224 and the 2005 WorkPlan and Budget of F$14,168,775.

15. OTHER BUSINESS

363. The Director presented a number of is-sues to full Council that were raised at Coun-cil’s informal session at the beginning of themeeting, which included many but not allCouncil members at this Session. She madeshort presentations on the following and in-vited the membership for their comments onthem:

a) Future Arrangements for SOPAC AnnualSessions.

b) Amendments and Review of the AgreementEstablishing SOPAC.

c) International Geological Congress 2012.

364. Referring to the informal session ofCouncil earlier in the week, the Director out-lined a possible future arrangement, whichshe suggested would result in cost efficiencies,and enhance programme delivery. The sug-

gested arrangement was to convene a full ses-sion bi-ennially and a Council-only meetingin intervening years.

365. With reference to the Amendments andReview of the SOPAC Agreement, the Direc-tor suggested that the significant organisa-tional changes and the recently amendedrules of procedure for executive appointmentsmay warrant Council to consider a compre-hensive review of the Agreement.

a) Future Arrangements for SOPAC AnnualSessions

366. Council members were generally appre-ciative of the rationale behind the changesthat had been mooted by the Director, and weresupported by some key STAR scientists.

367. Council concurred with Samoa andNauru’s suggestion for the Secretariat to pre-pare a detailed paper on the proposed AnnualSession arrangements and for the paper to bepresented at the next Council Session.

368. At Tonga’s expressed concern about hold-ing Annual Sessions every two years, CookIslands clarified that the change suggested bythe Director was not to stop annual meetings,but rather to have full Council meetings (withaccompanying STAR Session) every alternateyear, whereas Council would meet every year.Cook Islands further expressed their appre-ciation of the format of the Annual Sessionthis year, and encouraged the continuation ofthe holding of informal sessions.

369. The Marshall Islands welcomed any newinitiative with regards to the arrangementsfor Annual Sessions; if it would improve thecurrent structure of the annual meeting.

b) Amendments and Review of the Agree-ment establishing SOPAC

370. The Secretariat sought guidance fromCouncil on the potential for a future review ofthe Agreement establishing the Commission.

371. The Marshall Islands, while endorsingthe review of the Agreement establishingSOPAC, requested and proposed for considera-tion of a name change for the organization – aname that would truly reflect its membership.He went on to advise the Council that it wouldbe an opportune time, since other regionalorganisations had changed their names.Marshall Islands also reminded Council of

46

their earlier suggestion that Council mightwish to consider following SPC’s approach ofoffering a subsequent term to the incumbentCEO, without the need to advertise the posi-tion. He also advised that SPREP Council iscurrently considering adopting this approach.He further suggested that the offer of a sec-ond and final three-year contract would be in-cumbent upon a written expression of inter-est by the current CEO to a second term andsubject to their satisfactory performance of thecurrent term, which is to be measured andagreed to by Council. The expression of inter-est would need to be furnished to Council threemonths prior to the meeting of the GoverningCouncil.

372. Cook Islands also endorsed a review ofthe Agreement establishing SOPAC.

373. Council agreed that the Secretariat be-gin the process of a comprehensive review ofthe Agreement establishing SOPAC and inparticular prepare a paper on Article 1 with aview to a name change of the organisation.

c) International Geological Congress 2012

374. The Director invited Geoscience Aus-tralia Advisor, Wally Johnson, to inform Coun-cil about item 3.

375. The Advisor from Geoscience Australiainformed Council about the successful bid ledby the Chief Executive Officer of GeoscienceAustralia, to host the 34th International Geo-logical Congress (IGC) in Australia in 2012 andwas seeking SOPAC’s early involvement intaking this opportunity to present a compre-hensive perspective of Oceania. Council wasinformed that a key argument that won thebid was the focus on the importance of man-aging geohazards in the Pacific region, includ-ing both sudden impacts (tsunamis, earth-quakes) and longer time frame impacts (sea-level rise and climate change). The Advisorlater offered the CD presentation that won thebid for the 2012 IGC in Florence, to the Secre-tariat for viewing and dissemination to peo-ple interested in viewing it.

376. Geoscience Australia advised that theywould welcome SOPAC input and collaborationin the planning of the 34th IGC, with potentialfor running some sessions, and organisingfield trips in the Pacific Island region; and alsoSOPAC’s involvement in a promotional boothon the 34th IGC, to be displayed at the 33rd IGCin Oslo, Norway, in 2008. The Advisor ex-pressed hope that this Congress would in-

crease Geoscience Australia’s re-engagementin the Pacific Islands region.

377. Council members enthusiastically em-braced the overtures from Geoscience Aus-tralia and instructed the Secretariat to keepit informed about the renewed associationwith Geoscience Australia, and the develop-ments in the IGC undertaking.

378. Cook Islands encouraged SOPAC’s in-volvement in the hosting of IGC withGeoscience Australia.

379. Papua New Guinea expressed interest infurther discussions of issues with GeoscienceAustralia and urged fellow Council membersto support the initiative.

380. Marshall Islands and Tonga also wel-comed and endorsed the collaboration and as-sociation with Geoscience Australia with re-gard to the 34th IGC.

381. Council noted with appreciation the suc-cessful bid of ‘Oceania’ to host the 34th IGCand endorsed the idea of forming a consortiumto host the IGC in 2012 and encouraged theSecretariat to become engaged in any futureplanning.

16. VENUE AND DATE OF 34TH ANNUAL SESSION

382. Samoa informed Council of its intentionto host the next Council Session in Apia, Sa-moa, probably in October 2005. Samoa furtherinformed Council that the next SPREP Coun-cil meeting will also be held in Apia, and thatthere was a high likelihood that the meetingswould be held back to back, but that this wasto be determined at a later stage.

383. Council accepted Samoa’s offer to hostthe SOPAC 34th Session with acclamation.

17. ADOPTION OF AGREED RECORD OFPROCEEDINGS

384. Council adopted the agreed summaryrecord of proceedings of the 33rd SOPAC Ses-sion subject to amendments.

18. CLOSING

385. The Chair, on behalf of the Papua NewGuinea Government, and the Papua NewGuinea delegation attending the SOPAC 33rd

47

Session, expressed his sincere gratitude andappreciation to all Council members for theirsupport and cooperation. He also thanked theDirector and staff of the SOPAC Secretariatfor their support and assistance in the coordi-nation of the meeting, and the support stafffrom the Warwick Fiji International Resort.

386. The Chair acknowledged the excellentdiscussions at the meeting on issues affect-ing the livelihoods of communities in all Pa-cific Islands Countries, and expressed his in-tention that these deliberations should con-tinue. The Chair acknowledged the importantcontributions of all stakeholders, includingSOPAC Member Countries, the SOPAC Sec-retariat, and all scientists attending the meet-ing. The Chair wished everyone a safe jour-ney home and looked forward to the next An-nual Session meeting in Apia, Samoa in 2005.

387. The Director thanked the host govern-ment, Papua New Guinea, for a successfulmeeting, and the Chair, for his focused andable chairing through a grueling agenda, andlooked forward to working with Papua NewGuinea over the coming year. The Directorthanked all members of the Governing Coun-cil for their interventions and participation,which would direct the Secretariat over thenext year, and for their policy directions overthe longer term. The Director further thankedall Heads and representatives of CROP agen-cies, and national, regional and internationalorganisations. She thanked the Chair of STAR

and TAG advisors for their valuable scientificcontributions, noting the record number ofpresentations at the STAR session. She ac-knowledged the conveners of the meetingsheld in conjunction with the Annual Session:the Pacific Water Association meeting; andthe Workshop on Leadership for Pacific IslandsWater Managers.

388. The Director assured Council that all de-cisions and recommendations from the meet-ing would be addressed over the next year. Shethanked the Secretariat staff for their prepa-rations and servicing of the meetings. Finally,the Director thanked everyone for making herfirst Annual Session an enjoyable one.

389. New Zealand, on behalf of all Councilmembers, thanked the Chair, the Director andthe staff of the SOPAC Secretariat for theirefforts in making the meeting a success, andacknowledged the success of Cristelle Pratt’sfirst meeting as Director.

390. USP, on behalf of the Council of RegionalOrganisations of the Pacific, thanked all rep-resentatives at the meeting for allowing theUniversity to attend the Annual Session asan integral part of Council, and expressed hishope that CROP agencies would be regardedsimilarly at USP Council meetings.

391. The Chair brought the 33rd Annual Ses-sion of the SOPAC Governing Council to aclose at 10.45 am, Friday, 24 September 2004.

48

APPENDICES

1 List of Participants ................................................................................................... 49

2 Agenda .................................................................................................................... 60

3 Designation of National Representatives ..................................................................... 62

4 Statements by Delegations

Part I: Member Countries ................................................................................... 64

Part II: CROP Organisations ............................................................................... 77

Part III: Supporting Governments & International Agencies ................................... 85

Part IV: National Institutions.............................................................................. 88

5 STAR Chair’s Report to Council ................................................................................. 90

6 Revised Rules of Procedure on Executive Appointments

A: Procedures for Appointment of Director ........................................................... 98

B: Procedures for Appointment of Deputy Director.............................................. 100

7 List of Conference Room Documents ......................................................................... 101

8 Acronyms ............................................................................................................... 103

49

APPENDIX 1

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

MEMBER COUNTRIES

American Samoa

Mr Michel DworskyAmerican Samoa Power AuthorityP.O. Box PPBPago PagoAmerican Samoa 96799Tel: (684) 699 1462Fax: (684) 699 8070E-mail: miked@aspower.com

Mr Petero LafaeleAdministrator/Assistant ManagerWater DivisionASPAPO Box PPBPago Pago 96799Amerian SamoaTel: (684) 699 1299Fax: (684) 699 4035E-mail: petero@aspower.com

Australia

Ms Stacey TennantAusAIDP O Box 214Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3388272Fax: (679) 3382695E-mail: stacey.tennant@dfat.gov.au

Cook Islands

Mr Keu MataroaExecutive OfficerMinistry of WorksPO Box 102Rarotonga, Cook IslandsTel: (682) 20 034Fax: (682) 21134E-mail: k.mataroa@mow.gov.ck

Federated States of Micronesia

Mr Marion HenryDeputy Assistant SecretaryFisheries UnitDepartment of Economic AffairsP O Box PS-12, PalikirPohnpei, FM 96941Federated States of MicronesiaTel: (691) 320 5133Fax: (691) 320 5854E-mail: MarionH@mail.fm

Mr Gabriel AyinDeputy Chief of Mission

Embassy of the Federated States of MicronesiaPO Box 15498Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3304566Fax: (679) 3304081Email: gayin@fsmsuva.org.fj

Fiji Islands

Mr Ifereimi DauActing DirectorMineral Resources DepartmentNational Representative of Fiji to SOPACPrivate Mail Bag, SuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3381611Fax: (679) 3370039E-mail: director@mrd.gov.fj

Mr Onisivoro VuniyaroActing Chief Assistant SecretaryMinistry of Foreign Affairs & External TradeGPO Box 2220Government BuildingsSuva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3309 651Fax: (679) 3301 741

Mr Isireli NagataSenior Resource GeologistMineral Resources DepartmentPrivate Mail Bag, GPOSuva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3381611Fax: (679) 3370039E-mail: isireli@mrd.gov.fj

All the following with same address as above:

Mr Luna WongSenior Marine GeologistE-mail: l_wong@mrd.gov.fj

Mr Apete SoroEnvironmental OfficerE-mail: apete@mrd.gov.fj

Mr Jeremaiya TaganesiaSenior Mapping GeologistE-mail: jerry@mrd.gov.fj

Mr Sakiusa WaqanisauEmail: sakiusa@mrd.gov.fj

Mr Malakai FinauEmail: mala@mrd.gov.fj

Mr Salesh KumarEmail: salesh@mrd.golv.fj

Mr Amini LocoEmail: amini@mrd.gov.fj

50

Guam

Mr Mike GawelGuam Environmental Protection AgencyPO Box 22439 GMFBarrigada, GU 96921GuamTel: (671) 477 1658/1659Fax: (671) 477 9402E-mail: mgawel@govguam.net

Kiribati

Mr Raimon TaakeDeputy SecretaryMinistry of Fisheries & Marine Resources Develop-mentP O Box 64Bairiki, TarawaKiribatiTel: (686) 21 099Fax: (686) 21 120E-mail: raimont@mfmrd.gov.ki

H.E. Mr Meita BeiabureHigh CommissionerKiribati High CommissionP O Box 17937Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3302512Fax: (679) 3315335E-mail: kiribatihighcom@connect.com.fj

Ms Titeem AuatabuMinistry of Fisheries & Marine Resources Develop-mentP O Box 64Bairiki, TarawaKiribatiTel: (686) 21 099Fax: (686) 21 120

Marshall Islands

H.E. Mr Mack KaminagaAmbassadorEmbassy of the Republic of Marshall IslandsPO Box 2038Government BuildingsSuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3387 899Fax: (679) 3387 115E-mail: rmisuva@mailhost.sopac.org.fj

Nauru

H.E. Dr Ludwig KekeHigh CommissionerNauru High CommissionPO Box 2420Government BuildingsSuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3313566Fax: (679) 3302861E-mail: naurulands@connect.com.fj

New Caledonia

Mr Jean-Francois SauvageDimenc – BP 46598845 Noumea CedexNew CaledoniaTel: (687) 273944Fax: (687) 272345E-mail: jfsauvage@gouv.nc

New Zealand

Ms Sara CarleyDeputy DirectorNZAIDMinistry of Foreign Affairs & TradePrivate Bag 18-901, WellingtonNew ZealandTel: (644) 439 8480Fax: (644) 439 8513E-mail: sara.carley@mfat.govt.nz

Ms Nicola NgawatiPolicy OfficerPacific DivisionMinistry of Foreign Affairs & TradePrivate Bag 18-901, WellingtonNew ZealandTel: (644) 439 8113Fax: (644) 439 8521E-mail: nicola.ngawati@mfat.govt.nz

Ms Chris DayPacific GroupNZAIDMinistry of Foreign Affairs and TradePrivate Bag 18-901, WellingtonNew ZealandTel: (644) 439 8548Fax: (644) 439 8514E-mail: Chris.Day@mfat.govt.nz

Ms Nicky McDonaldNew Zealand High CommissionGPO Box 1378SuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3311422Fax: (679) 3300842E-mail: Nicky.McDonald@mfat.govt.nz

Niue

Mr Deve C.K. TalagiDirector of WorksPublic Works DepartmentPO Box 38Alofi, NiueTel: (683) 4297Fax: (683) 4223E-mail: pwd@mail.gov.nu

Palau

Mr Isaac Soaladaob, DirectorBureau of Foreign AffairsNational Representative of Palau to SOPAC

51

Ministry of StatePO Box 100Koror 96940, PalauTel: (680) 488 2408Fax: (680) 488 3680E-mail:bfa@palaunet.com

isaacsoaladaob@hotmail.com

Papua New Guinea

H.E. Mr Alexis Maino, High CommissionerPapua New Guinea High CommissionP O Box 2447Government Buildings, SuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 330 4244Fax: (679) 330 0178E-mail: kundufj@connect.com.fj

Mr Stevie T.S. Nion, Deputy SecretaryDepartment of MiningPMB, Port MoresbyPapua New GuineaTel: (675) 321 2945Fax: (675) 321 7958E-mail: steve_nion@mineral.gov.pg

Mr Kuike Numoi, First SecretaryPapua New Guinea High CommissionP O Box 2447Government Buildings, SuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 330 4244Fax: (679) 330 0178E-mail: kundufj@connect.com.fj

Mr Bernard Pawih, Deputy SecretaryDepartment of Petroleum & EnergyP O Box 1993Port MoresbyPapua New Guinea

Mr Joe Buleka, DirectorGeological Survey of PNGPMB, Port MoresbyPapua New GuineaTel: (675) 321 2945Fax: (675) 321 7958E-mail: joe_buleka@mineral.gov.pg

Mr Nathan Mosusu, Senior GeophysicistDepartment of MiningPMB, Port MoresbyPapua New GuineaTel: (675) 321 5888Fax: (675) 321 1360E-mail: Nathan_mosusu@mineral.gov.pg

Mr Lawrence AntonSenior SeismologistDepartment of MiningPMB, Port MoresbyPapua New GuineaTel: (675) 321 4500Fax: (675) 321E-mail: pngo@daltron.com.pg

Mr Harry KoreSenior Legal Officer, Commercial Law Division

Department of Justice & Attorney GeneralP O Box 591Waigani, NCDPapua New GuineaTel: (675) 301 2897/301 2896Fax: (675) 323 0241E-mail: hckore@hotmail.com

Mr Amo MarkPapua New Guinea WaterboardPO Box 2779Boroko, NCD IIIPort MoresbyPapua New GuineaTel: (675) 325 6866Fax: (675) 325 6836

Samoa

Ms Sharon Potoi-AiafiMinistry of Foreign Affairs & TradePO Box L1859Apia, SamoaTel: (685) 21171/25313Fax: (685) 21 504E-mail: Sharon@mfa.gov.ws

Mr Lameko Talia, Principal Scientific OfficerMeteorological DivisionDepartment of Agriculture, Forests, Fisheries & Me-teorology (MAFFM)P O Box 3020Apia, SamoaTel: (685) 20855/20856Fax: (685) 23732E-mail:lameko@samoa.ws

lamektal@yahoo.com

Solomon Islands

Mr Donn Tolia, Permanent SecretaryDepartment of Mines & EnergyNational Representative of Solomon Islands toSOPACPO Box G37Honiara, Solomon IslandsTel: (677) 28609Fax: (677) 258111E-mail: donn@mines.gov.sb

Mr Isaac LekelaluDeputy DirectorWater Resources DivisionDepartment of Mines & EnergyPO Box G37Honiara, Solomon IslandsTel: (677) 21521/26852Fax: (677) 258111E-mail: isaac@mines.gov.sb

Mr Ellson HabuActing Director of MinesDepartment of Mines & EnergyPO Box G37Honiara, Solomon IslandsTel: (677) 21521Fax: (677) 258111E-mail: ellsson@mines.golv.sb;

52

Tonga

Mr Tevita MaloloSecretary for Lands, Survey & Natural Resources& Surveyor GeneralNational Representative of Tonga to SOPACMinistry of Lands, Survey & Natural ResourcesPO Box 5, Nuku’alofa, TongaTel: (676) 23 611Fax: (676) 23 216E-mail: minlands@kalianet.to

Mr Tevita FataiMinistry of Lands, Survery & Natural ResourcesP O Box 5Nuku’alofa, TongaTel: (676) 23 611Fax: (676) 23 216E-mail: geology@kalianet.to

Tuvalu

H.E. Mr T. FinikasoHigh CommissionerTuvalu High CommissionGPO Box 14449SuvaTel: (679) 3301355Fax: (679) 3308479E-mail: finikaso@tuvaluhighcomm.org.fj

Mr Faatasi MalologaDepartment of Lands & SurveyFloor 1, Government BuildingsFunafuti, TuvaluTel: (680) 20170Fax: (680) 20167E-mail: mautama@hotmail.com

Mr Ian FryPO Box 7008Karabar NSW 2620AustraliaTel: (612) 6299 7558Fax: (612) 6284 3151E-mail: ianfry@ozemail.com.au

Vanuatu

Mr Christopher IoanDirector of Geology, Mines and Water SupplyPMB 9001Port Vila, VanuatuTel: (678) 23223Fax: (678) 22213E-mail: gmines@vanuatu.gov.vu

Mr Job Esau, DirectorNational Disaster Management OfficePolice HeadquartersPMB 9014Port VilaTel: (678) 22392/26570Fax: (678) 24465Email: je-vandis@vanuatu.com.vu Mr Mike BakeoliuLand Survey DepartmentPMB 9024Port Vila

VanuatuTel: (678) 22427Fax: (678) 26973E-mail: landsurvey@vanuatu.com.vu

COUNCIL OF REGIONAL ORGANISATIONSOF THE PACIFIC (CROP)

Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS)

Mr Greg UrwinSecretary-GeneralPacific Islands Forum SecretariatPrivate Mail Bag, SuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3312600Fax: (679) 3300192

Mr John LowResources AdviserPacific Islands Forum SecretariatPrivate Mail Bag, SuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3312600Fax: (679) 3300 192E-mail: johnl@forumsec.org.fj

Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC)

Mr Aleki SisifaDirector, Land ResourcesSecretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC)Private Mail BagSuva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3370733

Secretariat of the Pacific Regional EnvironmentProgramme (SPREP)

Mr Asterio Takesy, DirectorSecrretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Pro-grammePO Box 240Apia, SamoaTel: (685) 21 929Fax: (685) 20 231E-mail: asteriot@sprep.org.ws

Mr Solomone FifitaChief Technical AdviserSecretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Pro-grammePO Box 240Apia, SamoaTel: (685) 21 929Fax: (685) 20 231E-mail: SolomoneF@sprep.org.ws

University of the South Pacific (USP)

Father John BonatoHead of School / Pure and Applied SciencesUniversity of the South PacificPO Box 1168Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3313900/3308478Fax: (679) 3300482E-mail: bonato_j@usp.ac.fj

53

Dr James TerryHead of Geography DepartmentUniversity of the South PacificP O Box 1168, SuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3212549Fax: (679) 3301487E-mail: terry_j@usp.ac.fj

Prof. Leon ZannMarine Studies ProgrammeUniversity of the South PacificP O Box 1168Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3305272Fax: (679) 3301490E-mail: zann_l@usp.ac.fj

Ms Susanne PohlerMarine Studies ProgrammeUniversity of the South PacificP O Box 1168Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3212953E-mail: pohler_usp.ac.fj

Ms Sophia NarainMarine Studies ProgrammeUniversity of the South PacificP O Box 1168Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: 9271578E-mail:fuelme_sn@yahoo.com

Ms Ashishika SharmaMarine Studies ProgrammeUniversity of the South PacificP O Box 1168Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: 3384693Mob: 9264816E-mail: s000074535@student.usp.ac.fj

SUPPORTING GOVERNMENTS

Taiwan/ROC

H.E. Fu-Tien LiuRepresentative of ROC (Taiwan) to FijiTrade Mission of the Republic of China to Fiji (Tai-wan/ROC)GPO Box 53Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3315922Fax: (679) 3301890E-mail:tmroc@is.com.fj

Mr Adnan C.Y.TuSenior Assistant to the RepresentativeTrade Mission of the Republic of China to Fiji (Tai-wan/ROC)GPO Box 53Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3315922Fax: (679) 3301890E-mail:adnantu@mofa.gov.tw

SUPPORTING INTERNATIONALORGANISATIONS

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

Ms Marilyn CorneliusEnvironmental/GEF/Energy AssociateUNDPPrivate Mail Bag, GPOSuva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3312500Fax: (679) 3301718E-mail: marilyn.cornelius@undp.org

Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission(IOC)

Mr Miguel D. FortesHead UNESCO IOC/WESTPAC Regional Secretariat196 Phahonyothin RdChatujakBangkok, 10900, ThailandTel: (662) 5615118Fax: (662) 5615119E-mail: m.fortes@unescobkk.org

Mr William Erb, HeadIntergovernmental Oceanographic CommissionPerth Regional Programme OfficeC/O Bureau of MeteorologyP O Box 1370West Perth, WA 6872AustraliaTel: (618) 9226 2899Fax: (618) 9226 0599E-mail: W.Erb@bom.gov.au

Dr Laura KongUNESCO/IOC International Tsunami InformationCentre737 Bishop StSuite 2200Honolulu, HawaiiUSA 96813Tel: (808) 532 6423Fax: (808) 532 5576E-mail: laura.kong@noaa.gov

Pacific Power Association

Mr Gordon ChangOffice ManagerPacific Power AssociationPrivate Mail BagSuva,Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3306 022Fax: (679) 3302 038E-mail: gordonc@ppa.org.fj

54

SUPPORTING NATIONAL ORGANISATIONS

Australia Marine Science & Technology(AMSAT)

Dr Chalapan KaluwinRegional CoordinatorAustralia Marine Science & Technology (AMSAT)PO Box 17955SuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3304 003Fax: (679) 3304 003E-mail: amsatck@connect.com.fj

Ms Laura HolbeckAustralia Marine Science & Technology (AMSAT)PO Box 17955Suva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3304 003Fax: (679) 3304 003E-mail: amsath@conect.com.fj

British Geological Survey (BGS)

Dr David TappinBritish Geological SurveyKingsley Dunham CentreNottingham, NG12 5GGUnited KingdomTel: (44) 115 9363449Fax: (44) 115 9363200E-mail: drta@bgs.ac.uk

Georgia Institute of Technology

Dr David GartonSchool of Biology310 Ferst DriveAtlanta GA 30332United States of AmericaTel: (404) 385 1039Fax: (404) 894 0519E-mail: david.garton@biology.gatech.edu

Geoscience Australia

Dr R. Wally JohnsonGeohazards DivisionGeoscience AustraliaGPO Box 378, CanberraAustraliaTel: (612) 6249 9377Fax: (612) 6249 9986E-mail: wally.Johnson@ga.gov.au

Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences

Dr Alexander MalahoffChief ExecutiveInstitute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (GNS)P O Box 30-368Lower HuttNew ZealandTel: (644) 570 4692Fax: (644) 570 4723E-mail: a.malahoff@gns.cri.nz

Dr Noel TrustrumInstitute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (GNS)P O Box 30-368Lower HuttNew ZealandTel: (644) 570 4690Fax: (644) 570 1440E-mail: n.trustrum@gns.cri.nz

Dr Hugh CowanInstitute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (GNS)P O Box 30-368Lower HuttNew ZealandTel: (644) 570 4744Fax: (644) 570 4676E-mail: h.cowan@gns.cri.nz

Mr Dave HeronInstitute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (GNS)P O Box 30-368Lower Hutt, New ZealandTel: (644) 570 4610Fax: (644) 570 4600E-mail: d.heron@gns.cri.nz

Mr Phil GlasseyInstitute of Geological & Nuclear SciencesPrivate Bag 1930, DunedinNew ZealandTel: (643) 479 9684Fax: (643) 477 5232E-mail: p.glassey@gns.cri.nz

Ms Tamara TaitInstitute of Geological & Nuclear SciencesPrivate Bag 2000, TaupoNew ZealandTel: (64) 7 374 8211Fax: (64) 7 374 8199E-mail: t.tait@gns.cri.nz

Institut de Recherche pour le Développement(IRD)

Mr Bernard PelletierInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement(IRD,ex-ORSTOM)UR 082 - UMR Géosciences Azur 6526Laboratoire de Géologie-GéophysiqueBPA5, 98848 NouméaNouvelle-CalédonieTel: (687) 26 07 72Fax: (687) 26 43 26E-mail: Bernard.Pelletier@noumea.ird.nc

Mr Anicet BeauvaisInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement(IRD,ex-ORSTOM)UR 082 - UMR Géosciences Azur 6526Laboratoire de Géologie-GéophysiqueBPA5, 98848 NouméaNouvelle-CalédonieTel: (687) 260759Fax: (687) 260759E-mail: anicet.beauvais@noumea.ird.nc

Mr Pascal DouilletInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement

55

(IRD,ex-ORSTOM)UR 082 - UMR Géosciences Azur 6526Laboratoire de Géologie-GéophysiqueBPA5, 98848 NouméaNouvelle-CalédonieTel: (687) 260746Fax: (687) 264326E-mail: pascal.douillet@noumea.ird.nc

JAMSTEC

Dr Kazuhiro KitazawaJAMSTEC2-15 Natsushima-choYokosuka, 237-0061JapanTel: (81) 46 867 9191Fax: (81) 46 867 9195E-mail: kitazawa@jamstec.go.jp

Japan Oil, Gas & Metals National Corporation(JOGMEC)

Mr Nobuyuki (Nobu) OkamotoDeputy DirectorDeep-sea Minerals Exploration & TechnologyTeamMetals Research & Development GroupJapan Oil, Gas & Metals National Corporation1310 Omiya-Cho, Saiwai-KuKawasaki, 212-8554JapanTel: (81 44) 520 8688Fax: (81 44) 520 8730E-mail: okamoto-nobuyuki@jogmec.go.jp

Mr Natsumi KamiyaJOGMECCanberra OfficePO Box 253Civic Square, ACT 2608AustraliaTel: (612) 6248 0870Fax: (612) 6247 5865E-mail: jogmec@cyberone.com.au

Korea Institute of Geoscience and MineralResources (KIGAM)

Dr Se Won ChangKorea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Re-sources30 Gajung-dong, Yusong-gu,TaejonKorea 305-350Tel: (82) 42 868 3337Fax: (82) 42 862 7275E-mail: swchang@kigam.re.kr

Dr Seong-Pil KimKorea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Re-sources30 Gajung-dong, Yusong-gu,TaejonKorea 305-350Tel: (82) 42 868 3192Fax: (82) 42 862 7275E-mail: spkim@kigam.re.kr

Korea Ocean Research & Development Insti-tute (KORDI)

Dr Kyeong-Yong LeeKORDISa-dong 1270, Sangrock-kuAnsan KyunggidoKoreaTel: (82) 31 400 6370Fax: (82) 31 418 8772E-mail: kylee@kordi.re.kr

Dr Jai-Woon MoonKORDISa-dong 1270, Sangrock-kuAnsan KyunggidoKoreaTel: (82) 31 400 6360Fax: (82) 31 418 8772E-mail: jwmoon@kordi.re.kr

Landcare Research

Mr Peter NewsomeLandcare ResearchPrivate Bag 11 052Palmerston North, New ZealandTel: (646) 350 3811Fax: (646) 355 9230E-mail: newsomeP@LandcareResearch.co.nz

Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry(METI)

Mr Masaaki SasakiMineral and Natural Resources DivisionAgency for Natural Resources and EnergyMinistry of Economy, Trade and Industry1-3-1 KasumigasekiChiyoda-kuTokyo 100-8901JapanTel: (813) 3501 1511Fax: (813) 3580 8440E-mail: sasaki-masaaki@meti.go.jp

Metropolitan Fire & Emergency Services

Mr Brian ParryMetropolitan Fire & Emergency Services456 Albert StreetEast Melbourne, Victoria 3002AustraliaTel: (613) 9665 4211Fax: (613) 9665 4522E-mail: jbparry@mfbb.vic.gov.au

National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Re-search (NIWA)

Mr Doug RamsayNational Institute of Water & Atmospheric ResearchPO Box 11115Hamilton, New ZealandTel: (647) 859 1894Fax: (647) 856 0151E-mail: d.ramsay@niwa.co.nz

56

Dr Andrew MatthewsNational Institute of Water & Atmospheric ResearchPB 14-901, KilbirnieWellington, New ZealandTel: (644) 386 0528Fax: (644) 386 0574E-mail: a.matthews@niwa.co.nz

Natural Hazards New Zealand

Mr Graeme CampbellNatural Hazards New ZealandPO Box 294WellingtonNew ZealandTel: (644) 472 3377Fax: (644) 472 3423E-mail: graemec@acconsulting.co.nz

Nautilus Minerals Limited

Mr David HeydonNautilus Minerals Limited88 Stanmere StCarindale, Qld 4152AustraliaTel: (61) 400 747 400Fax: (617) 3395 3782E-mail: dheydon@NautilusMinerals.com

Pacific Disaster Center

Mr Stanley GoosbyPacific Disaster Center590 Lipoa Suite 259Kihei, MauiHawaii 91753Tel: (808) 891 7931E-mail: sgoosby@pdc.org

The Asia Foundation

Ms Kathryn HawleyThe Asia FoundationP O Box 15980, SuvaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3387101Fax: (679) 3382722E-mail: hawleytaf@connect.com.fj

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology

Ms Janita PahaladNational Climate CentreThe Australian Bureau of MeteorologyGPO Box 1289KMelbourne, Vic 3001AustraliaTel: (613) 9669 4781Fax: (613) 9669 4678E-mail: j.pahalad@bom.gov.au

The Pennsylvania State University

Dr Charles FisherProfessor of Biology

208 Mueller LaboratoryThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity Park, PA 16802United States of AmericaTel: (814) 865 3365Fax: (814) 865 9131E-mail: cfisher@psu.edu

University of California

Mr Dean RoemmichScripps Institution of OceanographyUniversity of California, San Diego 9500Gilman Drive MC 0230La Jolla, CA 92093-0230United States of AmericaTel: (858) 534 2307Fax: (858) 534 9820E-mail: droemmich@ucsd.edu

University of Hawaii

Dr Loren W KroenkeSchool of Ocean & Earth Science & TechnologyUniversity of Hawaii at Manoa1680 East West Road, Post 808Honolulu HI 96822United States of AmericaTel: (808) 956 7845Fax: (808) 956 5154E-mail: kroenke@soest.hawaii.edu

Dr Fernando MartinezUniversity of Hawaii1680 East West RoadPost Bldg, Rm 814Honolulu, HI 96822Tel: (808) 956 6882Fax: (808) 956 3188E-mail: Fernando@hawaii.edu

USA/Pacific Tsunami Warning Center

Mr Charles S. McCreeryUSA/Pacific Tsunami Warning Center91-270 Ft Weaver RdEwa Beach, HI 96706United States of AmericaTel: (808) 689 8207Fax: (808) 689 4543E-mail: charles.mccreery@noaa.gov

Victoria University of Wellington

Associate Professor John CollenSchool of Earth SciencesVictoria University of WellingtonPO Box 600, WellingtonNew ZealandTel: (644) 463 5071Fax: (644) 463 5186E-mail: john.collen@vuw.ac.nz

57

PWA AGM/UTILITIES WORKSHOP

Chuuk Public Utility Corporation

Mr Lucio HallersChief, Water DivisionChuuk Public Utility CorporationPO Box 910Weno, Chuuk StateFederated States of Micronesia 96942Tel: (691) 3302400/2476Fax: (691) 330 3259E-mail: larrygouland@yahoo.com

Cook Islands

Mr Ben ParakotiMinistry of WorksPO Box 102RarotongaCook IslandsTel: (682) 20034Fax: (682) 21134E-mail: hydro@oyster.net.ck

Commonwealth Utility Corporation

Ms Julia B. Cameron, Laboratory Specialist/ActingLaboratory ManagerCommonwealth Utility CorporationPO Box 501220Saipan, MP 96950Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana IslandsTel: (670) 322 5140Fax: (670) 322 9385E-mail: cuclab@gtepacifica.net; juliac@hawaii.edu

Fiji

Mr Paula WilisoniPublic Works DepartmentPrivate Mail BagSamabulaFiji IslandsTel: (679) 3384111Fax: (679) 3383013E-mail: pwilisoni@fijiwater.gov.fj

Guam Waterworks Authority

Mr Anthony ChargualafDistribution/Collection CoordinatorGuam Waterworks AuthorityPO Box 3010Hagatna, GuamTel: (671) 647 7862/7863Fax: (671) 646 3750E-mail: apcharg@mail.gov.gu

Kiribati

Mr Takei TaoabaPermanent SecretaryMinistry of Public Works and UtilitiesBetio, Tarawa, Kiribati

Mr Eita MetaiMinistry of Public Works and Utilities

Betio, Tarawa, KiribatiTel: (686) 26192E-mail: we.mwe@tskl.net.ki

Mr Taboia MetuteraPublic Utilities BoardP O Box 443Betio, Tarawa, KiribatiTel: (686) 26292Fax: (686) 26106E-mail: wsm.pub@tskl.net.ki

Mr Tokia GreigPublic Utilities BoardPO Box 443Betio, Tarawa, KiribatiTel: (686) 26192Fax: (686) 26106E-mail: wsm.pub@tskl.net.ki

Mr Riteti EritamaPublic Utilites BoardPO Box 443Betio, Tarawa, KiribatiTel: (686) 26292Fax: (686) 26106E-mail: wsm.pub@tskl.net.ki

Niue

Mr Andre SiohaneWater Supply ManagerNiue Public Works DepartmentPO Box 38, Alofi, NiueTel: (683) 4297Fax: (683) 4010E-mail: waterworks@mail.gov.nu

Palau Bureau of Public Works

Mr David Dengokl, ManagerKoror-Airai Water Treatment PlantPalau Bureau of Public WorksPO Box 1453, KororPalau 96940Tel: (680) 587 2333/2334Fax: (680) 587 3475E-mail: wtplant@palaunet.com

Pohnpei Utilities Corporation

Mr Esmond MosesPohnpei Utilities CorporationP O Box CKolonia, PohnpeiFederated States of Micronesia 96941Tel: (691) 320 2374Fax: (691) 320 2422E-mail: puc@mail.fm

Samoa Water Authority (SWA)

Moefaauo Taputoa TitimaeaSamoa Water AuthorityPO Box 245Apia, SamoaTel: (685) 20409Fax: (685) 21298E-mail: taputoa@swa.gov.ws

58

Mr Amataga PenaiaUpolu Operation Division ManagerSamoa Water AuthorityPO Box 245Apia, SamoaTel: (685) 20409Fax: (685) 21298E-mail: amataga@swa.gov.ws

Solomon Islands Water Authority (SWA)

Mr Leonard MeleiblaSolomon Islands Water AuthorityPO Box 1407, HoniaraSolomon IslandsTel: (677) 23985Fax: (677) 20723E-mail: lmeleibla@myrealbox.com

Yap State Public Service Corporation

Mr George LamanWater Treatment Plant Operations SupervisorYap State Public Service CorporationPO Box 667Colonia, Yap StateFederated States of Micronesia 96943Tel: (691) 350 4427/5533Fax: (691) 350 4518E-mail: yspsc@mail.fm; yspsc_water@mail.fm

Aquaduct Training

Mr Mark RushworthAquaduct Trading Pty Ltd27 Golden Square CrescentHoppers Crossing, Vic 3029AustraliaTel: (613) 9974 0011Fax: (613) 9974 0022E-mail: aquaduct@bigpond.com.au

East-West Center

Ms Meril Dobrin FujikiEast-West Center1601 East-West RoadHawaiiUnited States of America 96848-1601Tel: (808) 944 7352Fax: (808) 944 7600E-mail: fujikim@eastwestcenter.org

Ms Dorothy (Dee Dee) LettsPO Box 524Kaaawa, HITel: (808) 237 8980Fax: (808)E-mail: ddletts@lava.net

Timbertank Enterprises Ltd

Mr Morton JordanTimbertank Enterprises LimitedPO Box 18 239Glen Innes, AucklandNew Zealand

Tel: (64) 9 574 6572Fax: (64) 9 574 6573E-mail: penny@timbertanks.co.nz

Pacific Water Association

Ms Tara QicatabuaOffice ManagerPacific Water AssociationPrivate Mail BagSuva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3370402/9920155Fax: (679) 3370412E-mail: pwa@connect.com.fj

Mr Denis HarahanPacific Water AssociationTel: (61) 40 214 1156Fax: (61) 7 5527 9154E-mail: dmharahan@austarnet.com.au

SOPAC SECRETARIAT

South Pacific Applied Geoscience CommissionPrivate Mail Bag GPOSuva, Fiji IslandsTel: (679) 3381 377Fax: (679) 3370 040/3384 461E-mail: director@sopac.orgWebsite: www.sopac.org

Cristelle PrattDirectorE-mail: cristelle@sopac.org

Russell HoworthDeputy DirectorE-mail: russell@sopac.org

Mohinish KumarManager Corporate ServicesE-mail: mohinish@sopac.org

Alan MearnsManager Community RisksE-mail: alan@sopac.org

Bhaskar RaoManager Ocean & IslandsE-mail: bhaskar@sopac.org

Paul FairbairnManager Community LifelinesE-mail: paul@sopac.org

Alena MorocaE-mail: alena@sopac.org

Anare MatakivitiE-mail: anare@sopac.org

Andrick LalE-mail: andrick@sopac.org

Arti NaiduE-mail: arti@sopac.org

Atunaisa KaloumairaE-mail: atu@sopac.org

59

Avinash PrasadE-mail: avi@sopac.org

Craig PrattE-mail: craig@sopac.org

Doreen NaiduE-mail: doreen@sopac.org

Elizabeth LomaniE-mail: elizabeth@sopac.org

Emily McKenzieE-mail: emilym@sopac.org

Emily ArtackE-mail: emily@sopac.org

Franck MartinE-mail: franck@sopac.org

Gerhard ZierothE-mail: gerhard@sopac.org

Jan CloinE-mail: jan@sopac.org

Jens KrugerE-mail: jens@sopac.org

Jonathan MitchellE-mail: jonathan@sopac.org

Kakala VaveE-mail: kakala@sopac.org

Karen DattaE-mail: karen@sopac.org

Kata DuaibeE-mail: kata@sopac.org

Laisa BaoaE-mail: laisa@sopac.org

Lala BukarauE-mail: lala@sopac.org

Leslie AllinsonE-mail: les@sopac.org

Litia WaradiE-mail: litia@sopac.org

Makereta ManueliE-mail: makereta@sopac.org

Marc OvermarsE-mail: marc@sopac.org

Michael BonteE-mail: michael@sopac.org

Naomi Atauea

Netatua PrescottE-mail: netatua@sopac.org

Noud LeendersE-mail: noud@sopac.org

Rhonda BowerE-mail: rhonda@sopac.org

Robert SmithE-mail: robert@sopac.org

Rupeni MarioE-mail: rupeni@sopac.org

Sakaio ManoaE-mail: sakaio@sopac.org

Sarah Grimes

Sandra MelznerE-mail: melzner@sopac,org

Sarah DaviesE-mail: sarah@sopac.org

Sarabjeet SinghE-mail: sarabjeet@sopac.org

Stephen BoothE-mail: stephen@sopac.org

Tariq MohammedE-mail: tir14@student.canterbury.ac.nz

Vilisi TokalauvereE-mail: vtokalauvere@mrd.org.fj

Wolf ForstreuterE-mail: wolf@sopac.org

Yogita BhikabhaiE-mail: yogita@sopac.org

ADVOCACY TEAM

Roger JonesEmail: temcons@netcon.net.au

Dr Langi KavalikuPro-ChancellorUniversity of the South PacificE-mail: prochan@usp.ac.fj

CHAIR OF STAR

Associate Professor John CollenSchool of Earth SciencesVictoria University of WellingtonPO Box 600Wellington, New ZealandTel: (644) 463 5345Fax: (644) 463 5186E-mail: john.collen@vuw.ac.nz

60

APPENDIX 2

AGENDA

SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND RESOURCES NETWORK (STAR) SESSIONThe themes for the STAR Session will be: “Mineral policy, plate tectonics & offshore mining;

Hazard assessment & risk management; Water, sanitation & human settlement”

OPENING SESSION OF GOVERNING COUNCIL1. OPENING

1.1 Information Circular [AS33/1.1]1.2 Programme for Official Opening

2. ELECTIONS2.1 Chair and Vice-Chair of SOPAC (No Paper)2.2 Chairs of STAR and TAG (No Paper)2.3 Appointment of Rapporteurs (No Paper)

3. AGENDA AND WORKING PROCEDURES3.1 Provisional Agenda [AS33/3.1Rev]

Draft Working Schedule [AS33/3.1/Info 1]Working Procedures [AS33/3.1/Info 2]List of Conference Room Documents [AS33/3.1/Info 3Rev]

3.2 Appointment of Drafting Committee (No Paper)3.3 Appointment of Sub- Committee (should any be necessary) (No Paper)

4. REPRESENTATION4.1 Designation of SOPAC National Representatives [AS33/4.1]

5. STATEMENTS (The intention is that these statements be tabled for inclusion in theProceedings, and not presented verbally in full)5.1 Statements from Member Countries (No Papers)5.2 Statements by CROP Organisations (No Papers)5.3 Statements from Supporting Governments and International Agencies (No Papers)5.4 Statements from National Institutions (No Papers)

COUNCIL – TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUP (TAG) SESSION (MEMBER COUNTRIES ANDOTHER DELEGATES DISCUSS THE SOPAC TECHNICAL WORK PROGRAMME)

6. ISSUES COMMON TO ALL PROGRAMMES6.1 SOPAC Reports

6.1.1 2003 Annual Report Summary [AS33/6.1.1]6.1.2 Summary Report of 2004 Donor Support [AS33/6.1.2]6.1.3 Review of Country Profiles [AS33/6.1.3]6.1.4 SOPAC Work Programme and the MDGs [AS33/6.1.4]6.1.5 International Meeting on SIDS, Mauritius January 2005 [AS33/6.1.5]6.1.6 Report on SOPAC Activities Concerning Climate Change, Sea Level Rise,

Climate Variability and Extreme Weather Events [AS33/6.1.6]6.2 CROP Summary Report [AS33/6.2]6.3 STAR Chair Report [AS33/6.3]6.4 SOPAC/EU Project Report [AS33/6.4]

7. OCEAN AND ISLANDS PROGRAMME7.1 Report on the Ocean and Islands Programme for 2004 [AS33/7.1]7.2 Issues Arising in the Ocean and Islands Programme [AS33/7.2]

61

8. COMMUNITY LIFELINES PROGRAMME8.1 Report on the Community Lifelines Programme for 2004 [AS33/8.1]8.2 Issues Arising in the Community Lifelines Programme [AS33/8.2]

9. COMMUNITY RISK PROGRAMME9.1 Report on the Community Risk Programme for 2004 [AS33/9.1]9.2 Issues Arising in the Community Risk Programme [AS33/9.2]

10. PROGRAMME REVIEW MONITORING AND EVALUATION [AS33/10]

GOVERNING COUNCIL POLICY SESSION(Items in this session could be restricted to Member Countries and CROP Organisations if the

items require only Council consideration. Otherwise this session will be open).

11. DIRECTOR’S ANNUAL REPORT11.1 Introduction11.2 SOPAC 2005-2009 SOPAC Corporate Plan and Programme and

Strategies [AS33/11.2]11.3 Leader’s Pacific Plan [AS33/11.3]

12. FINANCIAL REPORTS12.1 Financial Report 2003

12.1.1 2003 Audited Financial Statements, Auditors Report andManagement Report [AS33/12.1.1]

12.1.2 Report on 2003 Regular Budget Variance and Virement ofFunds [AS33/12.1.2]

12.1.3 Report on Assets and Inventory written off for the yearended 31 December 2003 [AS33/12.1.3]

12.2 Report on 2004 Accounts to 30 June12.2.1 Financial Accounts for the 6-month period to June 2004 [AS33/12.2.1]12.2.2 Membership Contributions [AS33/12.2.2]

13. ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION13.1 Rules of Procedure for Executive Appointments [AS33/13.1]13.2 Deputy Director Position [AS33/13.2]13.3 SOPAC Staff Remuneration – CROP Remuneration Review Report [AS33/13.3]13.4 Reappointment of Contract Staff since 32nd Annual Session [AS33/13.4]13.5 Secretariat Integrated Corporate Risk Management Plan [AS33/13.5]13.6 Review of ICT, Library and Publications Guidelines [AS33/13.6]13.7 Review of Financial Regulations [AS33/13.7]

14. 2004 WORK PROGRAMME AND BUDGET14.1 Reserve Fund Ceiling [AS33/14.1]14.2 Appointment of Auditor [AS33/14.2]14.3 Approval of 2005 Work Plan and Budget [AS33/14.3]

15. OTHER BUSINESS

16. VENUE AND DATE OF 34th ANNUAL SESSION

17. ADOPTION OF AGREED RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

18. CLOSING

62

APPENDIX 3

DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL REPRESENTATIVES

American Samoa: Mr Michael Dworsky, Manager, Environmental Engineering Division, AmericanSamoa Power Authority, P.O. Box PPB, Pago Pago 96799, American Samoa. Tel: (684) 699-1462,Fax: (684) 699-8070. Email: miked@aspower.com

Australia: HE Ms Jennifer Rawson, Australian High Commissioner, PO Box 214, Suva, Fiji Is-lands. Tel: (679) 338 2211, Fax: (679) 338 2065. Email: jennifer.rawson@dfat.gov.au

Cook Islands: Mr Edwin Pittman, Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Immigration, PO Box105, Rarotonga, Cook Islands, Tel: (682) 29347, Fax: (682) 21247. Email: secfa@foraffairs.gov.ck

Federated States of Micronesia: Secretary, Department of Foreign Affairs, PO Box 12, Palikir,Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia, Tel: (691) 3202620, Fax: (691) 3205854. Email:fsmrd@mail.fm

Fiji Islands: The Director, Mineral Resources Department, Private Mail Bag GPO, Suva, Fiji, Tel:(679) 3387065, Fax: (679) 3370039. Email: director@mrd.gov.fj

French Polynesia: Mr Bruno Peaucellier, Head of International Affairs, PO Box 2551, Papeete,Tahiti. Tel: (689) 472268; Fax: (689) 472202. Email: bruno.peaucellier@presidence.pf

Guam: Mr Fred M. Castro, Administrator, Guam Environmental Protection Agency, PO Box 22439GMF, Barrigada, GU96921, USA. Tel: (1) (671) 475-1658/59, Fax: (1) (671) 477-9402. Email:fmcastro@govguam.net

Kiribati: Mr David Yeeting, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Fisheries & Marine Resources Devel-opment, PO Box 64, Bairiki, Tarawa, Kiribati, Tel: (686) 21099, Fax: (686) 21120. Email:davidy@mfmrd.gov.ki

Marshall Islands: Mr Raynard Gideon, Acting Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade, Gov-ernment of the Marshall Islands, PO Box 2, Majuro MI 96960, Marshall Islands, Tel: (692) 6253012,Fax: (692) 6254979. Email: mofapol@ntamar.net

Nauru: Ms Kim Hubert, Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Department of Foreign Affairs, GovernmentOffices, Yaren District, Nauru, Tel: (674) 4443133, Fax: (674) 4443105. Email:kimhubert@cenpac.net.nr

New Caledonia: Dr Yves Lafoy, Head of the Geology Section, Direction de l’Industrie, des Mines etde L’Energie (DIMENC), BP 465, Noumea 98845, New Caledonia, Tel: (687) 273944, Fax: (687)272345. Email: yves.lafoy@gouv.nc

New Zealand: The High Commissioner, New Zealand High Commission, GPO Box 1378, Suva, Fiji,Tel: (679) 3311422, Fax: (679) 3300842.

Niue: Mrs Sisilia G. Talagi, Secretary to Government, Premier’s Department, Office of the Secre-tary to Government, PO Box 40, Alofi, Niue, Tel: (683) 4200, Fax: (683) 4232/4151. Email:sog.premier@mail.gov.nu

Palau: Mr Gilbert Demei, Director, Bureau of Lands and Survey, Ministry of Resources & Develop-ment, P.O. Box 100, Koror, Palau 96940, Tel: (680) 488-2332, Fax: (680) 488-3195. Email:bls@palaunet.com

63

Papua New Guinea: Mr Kuma Aua, OBE, Secretary, Department of Mining, Private Mail Bag, PortMoresby Post Office, National Capital District, Papua New Guinea, Tel: (675) 3211961, Fax: (675)3213701. Email: kuma_aua@mineral.gov.pg

Samoa: Mr Aiono Mose Pouvi Sua, Chief Executive Officer, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade,PO Box L1859, Apia, Samoa, Tel: (685) 25313/21171, Fax: (685) 21504. Email: mfa@mfa.gov.ws

Solomon Islands: Mr Donn Tolia, Permanent Secretary, Department of Mines and Energy, Minis-try of Mines and Energy, PO Box G37, Honiara, Solomon Islands, Tel: (677) 28609/25974/25,Fax: (677) 25811. Email: donn@mines.gov.sb

Tonga: Mr Tevita Malolo, Secretary & Surveyor General, Ministry of Lands, Surveys and NaturalResources,PO Box 5, Nuku’alofa, Tonga, Tel: (676) 23611, Fax: (676) 23216. Email:minlands@kalianet.to

Tuvalu: Mr Afelee Pita, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Natural Resources, Private Mail Bag,Funafuti, Tuvalu, Tel: (688) 20827, Fax: (688) 20167. Email: mnre@tuvalu.tv

Vanuatu: Mr Steven Tahi, Director-General, Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources, PrivateMail Bag 007, Port Vila , Vanuatu, Tel: (678) 23105, Fax: (678) 25165. Email:steve.tahi@vanuatu.com.vu/steve.tahi@yahoo.com

64

APPENDIX 4

STATEMENTS BY DELEGATIONS

PART I: STATEMENTS FROM MEMBER COUNTRIES

AUSTRALIA

Australian marine geoscience surveys of inter-est to SOPAC: 2004 and 2005

Kenn Plateau off northeast Australia (NevilleExon, GA: 3-28 May, 2004) – RV Southern Sur-veyor SS 05/2004 [www.marine.csiro.au/nationalfacility/voyagedocs/2004]

This large, poorly known marine plateau lieseast of the Cato Trough, and its eastern thirdincludes the Bellona seamount chain, and isFrench/New Caledonian territory. Sydney Uni-versity and New Caledonian (Yves Lafoy) repre-sentatives took part. A seismic and swath-map-ping survey provided information for a seabedsampling programme. The plateau consists ofa number of continental basement blocks sepa-rated by east or northeast trending sedimen-tary troughs. The plateau separated from Aus-tralia in the Late Cretaceous (~90 Ma) andmoved northeastward until the early Eocene(~52 Ma). Hot spot traces formed two chains ofnorth-south seamounts in the Oligocene andMiocene, and these chains form the eastern andwestern plateau margins. The main sedimen-tary sequences appear to be: Cretaceous andPaleocene siliciclastics; Paleocene and Eocenechalks; Oligocene and younger chalks andoozes.

New Hebrides arc-backarc system (RichardArculus, ANU: 2-27 June, 2004) – RV South-ern Surveyor SS 06/2004 [www.marine.csiro.au/nationalfacility/voyagedocs/2004]

This cruise successfully undertook high-reso-lution swath-mapping, to highlight regions ofvolcanic and hydrothermal activity in arc andadjacent backarc (Coriolis Troughs) basins, andcollected volcanic and water samples. Exten-sive samples were collected of the magmas thatform the arc edifices and floors of the Vate andFutuna Troughs, some of the youngest back-arc basins in the world. Participants came from

Australia, New Zealand and Vanuatu.

Hunter Fracture Zone system (LeonidDanyushevsky, University of Tasmania: 2-26October, 2004) – RV Southern Surveyor SS 10/2004 [www.marine.csiro.au/nationalfacility/voyagedocs/2004]

This cruise is designed to investigate the pe-trology of the young spreading crust of thesouthernmost South Fiji Basin, where oceaniccrust is being recycled after being subductedat the Hunter subduction zone.

Tofua Arc system (Richard Arculus, ANU: 27October – 23 November, 2004) – RV SouthernSurveyor SS 11/2004 [www.marine.csiro.au/nationalfacility/voyagedocs/2004]

This cruise is designed to study hydrothermalplume activity and petrology in the northernTofua Arc of Tonga.

Torres Strait (Andrew Heap, GA: 8-28 Octo-ber, 2004) – RV James Kirby

A repeat survey to measure the movement ofsandwaves next to Turnagain Island and theeffects (if any) on the distribution, abundanceand survival of seagrass in Torres Strait. A sec-ond objective is to map the seabed and benthichabitats and measure turbidity. Data collectedwill be: high-resolution swath bathymetry andbackscatter, water samples, currents fromwaves and tides, near-bed suspended sediment,surface grab samples and shallow cores. Ocea-nographic data will be used to validate a re-gional ocean model for the region being devel-oped in-conjunction with CSIRO.

Mellish Rise off northeast Australia (NevilleExon, GA: 26 November – 22 December, 2004)– RV Southern Surveyor SS 12/2004[www.marine.csiro.au/nationalfacility/voyagedocs/2004]

65

This large, poorly known marine plateau liesnorth of the Kenn Plateau, and part of it isFrench/New Caledonian territory. Sydney Uni-versity and New Caledonian representatives willtake part. A seismic and swath-mapping sur-vey will provide information for a seabed sam-pling programme. The plateau probably con-sists largely of continental basement. It trendsnortheast, with the Louisiade Trough to thenorthwest and the South Rennell and BamptonTroughs to the southeast.

Fraser Island canyons off northeast Australia(Ron Boyd, University of Newcastle: 7 -25 Janu-ary, 2005) – RV Southern Surveyor SS 1/2005[www.marine.csiro.au/nationalfacility/voyagedocs/2004]

Large quantities of sand are transported northalong the New South Wales and Queenslandcoast forming sand islands. Fraser Island is themost northerly sand island and, north of it, thecontinental shelf narrows and the remainingsand makes its way to the abyssal plain viasubmarine canyons. Boyd has extensively stud-ied the shallow water part of the sand trans-port system, and intends to study the deeperpart of the system on this cruise, using profil-ing and sampling techniques.

Gulf of Carpentaria (Peter Harris, GA: 23 Feb-ruary – 18 March, 2005) – RV Southern Sur-veyor

A survey to extend mapping work undertakenin the southern Gulf in 2003. The main aim ofthe survey is to investigate and map seabedhabitats in the southern Gulf withparticular emphasis on reef-like structures. These structures have taken on more impor-tance after the discovery of previously unknownpatch coral reefs in the southern Gulf in 2003.Data collected will be: high-resolution swathbathymetry and backscatter, sub-bottom pro-files, water samples, currents from waves andtides, near-bed suspended sediment, surfacegrab samples, underwater video footage, and shallow cores. The data will be used insupport of regional marine planning and theproduction of the northern Regional MarinePlan.

Arafura Sea (Graham Logan, GA: 16 April – 16May, 2004) – RV Southern Surveyor

This survey is to explore the nature and distri-bution of possible natural hydrocarbon seeps

and the Late Quaternary history of the ArafuraShelf. The survey is an extension of a survey toinvestigate hydrocarbon seeps on the YampiShelf in 2003 where it was found that biotaand habitats associated with seep sites werequite diverse. So the survey is also designed tomap seabed habitats, with particular focus onthe nature of habitats associated with hydro-carbon seeps. Another major aim of the surveyis to understand the Late Quaternary historyof the shelf region, and in particular the rolethe channel system in the north played in thedelivery of sediment from the Gulf ofCarpentaria to the Timor Trough. We expectthat some of the deeper regions will contain arelatively complete sedimentary record that mayreflect the environmental changes in the Gulfof Carpentaria and may provide more detailabout these changes. Data collected will be:high-resolution swath bathymetry andbackscatter, seismic, side scan sonar, under-water video footage, shallow cores, water sam-ples, currents from waves and tides, near-bedsuspended sediment, benthic sleds, rockdredges and surface grab samples. The datawill be used in support for acreage release andregional marine planning and the productionof the northern Regional Marine Plan.

Compiled by Neville Exon and Andrew Heap ofGeoscience Australia

COOK ISLANDS

Mr Chairman, Your Excellencies, DistinguishedNational Representatives, Donor Governmentsand Agencies, The CROP Agencies and yourRepresentatives, The SOPAC/STAR Commu-nity, Ladies & Gentlemen

The Cook Islands is once more pleased to berepresented here in Fiji, to participate in this33rd Annual Session of the SOPAC GoverningCouncil.

The Cook Islands wishes to affirm its strongsupport and continued support for SOPAC andhighly values the work of SOPAC in relation to:

• Energy

• Water & Sanitation

• Coastal, Foreshore and Maritime Manage-ment

• Disaster Management

• Information, Communications and Tech-nology

• Marine Resources

66

• Technical Advice

As it continues to improve the lives of the Peo-ple of the Cook Islands.

Having regard for the three Programme Areasof SOPAC

• Community Lifelines

• Community Risk and,

• Oceans & Islands

The Cook Islands acknowledges the assistanceto date by the Secretariat, in providing the ap-propriate “tool” in facilitating the respectiveprojects and programmes incorporated in thethree focus areas.

The direction of the organisation is with theaspirations of our people in the Pacific in en-suring that sustainability in all sectors are en-compassed to improve our qualities of life.

The Cook Islands recognizes and appreciatesthe many valuable contributions that SOPACwas able to undertake over the past year, forwhich we express our sincere gratitude.

We would also like to acknowledge with sin-cere appreciation the continued support of theDonor Governments and Agencies, and theSTAR Community in supporting the work ofSOPAC. The Cook Islands has benefited fromthe STAR Community in Marine Resource De-velopment.

Task Profiles

The Task Profiles of the Cook Islands show thatsome of the tasks are still outstanding and oruncompleted. It is imperative that these arefacilitated as they have been aligned with Na-tional Development Programmes of the Coun-try. The Cook Islands would welcome an op-portunity for further dialogue where appropri-ate.

Marine Resources

The Cook Islands was fortunate to acquire fund-ing and therefore requested SOPAC to mobilizea SOPAC Team to assist with a number of La-goon Mapping programmes. This was a resultof the successful Pearl Farm Management Ex-ercise undertaken by SOPAC in the last 2 years,this we are very appreciative of and wishes toexpress our gratitude to SOPAC and the DonorPartners.

The empowerment of the Island Council mem-bers have resulted in better management prac-

tices being established and farming manage-ment plans have improved the decision mak-ing process of the Cook Islands PearlIndustry. Having said that, the main highlightis that, an awareness “Tool” has been very use-ful.

Foreshore & Coastal Management for DisasterManagement Purposes and InfrastructureDevelopment

SOPAC was engaged by the Cook Islands to fa-cilitate the acquisition of data for monitoringof lagoon parameters, pertaining to Foreshoreand Coastal Management for a disaster relatedproject. This was conducted as a Fore Reef SlopeMapping for a Wave Up Run Monitoring Project.

The Cook Islands wishes to endorse a furtherCHARM Process to be carried out in the Pacificas the Advocacy Team Visit was very informa-tive and it is the wish of our Country that thisprocess be accorded urgent attention, as Natu-ral Disasters are on the rise in relation to Cli-mate Change and Variability.

Conclusion

Having highlighted a few of the issues relatingto the Cook Islands, Mr Chairman, the CookIslands would like to join with the other del-egations in congratulating you as Chair of Gov-erning Council, and to thank you and yourGovernment for hosting this 33rd Session of theSOPAC Governing Council. We are most confi-dent that under your able guidance and lead-ership, we will be able to accomplish our aimsas approved by Council.

May I also, on behalf of the Government of theCook Islands, acknowledge the valuable guid-ance that we have had from the outgoing Chair,in the person of Sisilia Talagi, and that of theGovernment of Niue. Meitaki Maata

With those remarks Mr Chairman, the CookIslands looks forward to working with you andthe Secretariat in achieving the best for thePeople of the Pacific.

Kia Orana e Kia Manuia

FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA

Mr Chairperson, Members of Governing Coun-cil, Ladies and Gentlemen

Mr Chairman, FSM Delegation at the outset ofthis Annual Session wishes to join other mem-bers around this table to congratulate you in

67

assuming the Chairmanship of the 33rd Gov-erning Council of SOPAC and convey our gov-ernment’s appreciation to you and your gov-ernment for hosting this Session here at thebeautiful Coral Coast in Fiji. We look forwardto working closely with you as you lead usthrough these proceedings and throughout theyear as you lead our organisation.

Mr Chairman, we wish to express our appre-ciation to the Outgoing Chair, Niue for excel-lent work over the past year and especially guid-ing the last Governing Council through diffi-culty procedures.

It will be remised of this delegation, if we donot at the outset of this Session take the op-portunity express our government appreciationto all the donors governments for their gener-ous financial support throughout the past yearswith which have made possible to implementthe work programmes of this organisation andwithout them would have been difficulty toimplement the countries projects. For this, FSMis most grateful to all the donors for their gen-erosity and support as reflected in the increaseproposed work programmes and budget for2005.

Mr Chairman, our delegation wishes to be onrecord again this year that FSM still concernsabout coastal management, small island vul-nerability, continued threat of low laying atollswith sea level rise and related climate changeissues. Again, we appeal to SOPAC to continueto assist us in these areas. A more detail inter-ventions will be provided as we move along theagenda on different work programmes underthe jurisdiction of SOPAC Secretariat

The followings are Work programmes andBudget 2005m and beyond:

• Continental shelf survey/mapping in rela-tion to claim to Continental Shelf Author-ity (UNCLOS). SOPAC requested to assistin developing TOR, proposal and seekingdonors.

• Seawater inundation into taro patches.SOPAC requested to assess problem, par-ticularly in low-lying islands, of seawaterintrusion into taro patches, includingcoastal erosion problems contributing toproblems and ways for beach (coast) nour-ishment to mitigate.

• Development of emergency preparedness/mitigation plan. SOPAC is requested to as-sist the State of Yap, FSM in completingEmergency Preparedness/ Mitigation Planand to review plans for Pohnpei, Chuuk andKosrae with a view to update as necessary.

• GIS Assistance/ Capacity Building for usein Fisheries. SOPAC is requested to assitFSM in acquisition of GIS Software andtraining on use and maintenance as a toolfor coastal zone habitat/ resource assess-ment and monitoring.

• Bathymetric Mapping. SOPAC is requestedto complete bathymetric mapping startedfor both Chuuk and Yap and to increasearea of coverage to include Pohnpei andKosrae states.

Details of requests have been discussed withMr Robert Smith, “buddy” for the FederatedStates of Micronesia. The above are in additionto requested already tabled with SOPA.

It is expected that others will be made and filedduring visit of the SOPAC Director (and staff)slated for October 2004.

Mr Chairman, this delegation looks forward toa fruitful discussion in the coming few days aswe seek ways on how best to chart out a morepractical course of action on the Work Pro-grammes and policy issues for the upcomingyear.

FIJI ISLANDS

Chairman, Distinguished Delegates Excellen-cies, Head of CROP Organisation, Colleagues,Ladies and Gentlemen.

Please allow me at the outset to extend on be-half of the Fiji delegation our acknowledgementto the wise counsel and leadership of the out-going Chair of Niue during the past twelvemonths. We do sympathise with the people ofNiue.

May I also congratulate the in coming Chair,PNG, for assuming the Chairmanship role andwe do look forward to your able leadership inthe duration of this meeting.

May we also thank the Government of PNG forhosting this meeting in Fiji which can only con-tribute positively to Fiji’s economy.

We also would like to congratulate Ms CristellePratt, on her assumption on Director for thefine work that has been achieved in the pastyear. Fiji does offer its full support and com-mitment to the Director and Secretariat.

Very briefly on behalf of the Fiji delegation Iwould also like to express our gratitude to ourvarious donors. The Government of Japan hasbeen helping us conduct a baseline environ-mental and geochemical survey of Southern Viti

68

Levu. That study has now been completed. Nowthey are also willing and ready to help us on anoffshore addition the study, which were are nowexpanding to involve other stakeholders in Fiji,they also have assisted us in installing our VSATsystem for earthquake monitoring. Now we havea project in the planning stages to reactivatesome of the old Japanese-funded VHF stations,again with Japan’s help. Fiji is thankful for themarine scientific research into the North FijiBasin and is hopeful that the cooperation be-tween the two countries and SOPAC would con-tinue. A number of our geological and miningstaff have attended training courses in Japanunder Japan’s international cooperation ar-rangement.

We also acknowledge the Government of Indiafor the training it has been offering to studentsand civil servants from Fiji in the field ofgeoscience.

Australia has offered a place to one of our ge-ologists for the upcoming cruise of RV. South-ern Surveyor into the Southern Pacific Oceanas well as providing people to SOPAC for train-ing courses and workshops from which we havebenefited.

Fiji’s Mining Act was reviewed under Austral-ian aid and is now being drafted by the formerFirst Parliamentary Counsel for New SouthWales.

New Zealand have been helping us in manag-ing our Land Information systems as well asthe provision of expertise in the field ofgroundwater investigations.

We are also grateful to the European Union andits member countries for all the help they havegiving to Fiji directly and through SOPAC. Anew landfill facility is nearing completion forwhich we are thankful.

Our Seismologist is leaving this weekend toattend a training course in Germany.

We are also thankful to the Government ofPapua New Guinea for releasing Dr GraemeHancock of the World Bank project to come andconduct a mining taxation workshop for ourSenators and officials from Government and theprivate sector.

Of the international and regional organisationswe are grateful to the Economic and SocialCommission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)for their help in tying up mining policy issuesand for the provision of experts in watershedmanagement and other fields.

The World Bank sent a number of missions toFiji and if anything it helped increase the pres-sure our Finance Ministry to provide fundingfrom this year for the review of the Mining Act.

We are indeed grateful for all the help we havegiven and if we have left someone out we apolo-gise.

On other matters, I believe that members andthe Secretariat are keen to know when SOPACcould move in the Pacific Village complex onSuva’s foreshore. We apologise for the delays.On progress to date all the survey works anddrawings have been completed with the rec-ommendations conveyed to the Ministry of Fi-nance for their final decision on the sources offunding. We remain hopeful that funds wouldbe identified and secured sooner rather thanlater.

Finally, we do look forward to another year offruitful collaboration with SOPAC and withmember countries.

Thank you.

KIRIBATI

Chairman – Thank you for giving me the floor.

Chairman, Director, fellow Council Members,ladies and gentlemen ...

I was prepared to give a long verbal statement,but concerning the time constraint, I will bevey brief.

Chairman, first of all let me thank the Outgo-ing Chair, Niue, for their chairmanship ... Sec-ondly, I would like to congratulate Papua NewGuinea for hosting the 33rd annual meeting andyour readiness to accept the chairmanship atthis meeting and for the coming year. We wishPNG all the best in this deliberation.

Thirdly, Mr Chairman let me take this oppor-tunity to officially congratulate Cristelle Pratton her achievement of taking the post as a Di-rector of SOPAC. I am sure the good workingrelationship between SOPAC and Kiribati willcontinue under your leadership. We wish youall the best

Chairman, the last but not least, let me ac-knowledge and thank SOPAC for the series ofsupport that has been undertaken and the con-tinuation of technical support and assistanceto Kiribati.

69

Apart from the implemented and still imple-mented and yet to be implemented Projects, andProgrammes, may I briefly mention few projectsKiribati wishes to ask this Session to support.We had prepared a long shopping list of theseprojects but I will mention the high priority oneswhich are as follows:

1) Programmes under the ReducingVulnerabilities: the need of training onMapInfo, GIS and Remote Sensing.

2) Programmes under Lifelines: the need forSOPAC to carry out a feasibility study insetting up the National IT unit in Kiribati.

3) The need of assistance on Water and Sani-tation Projects.

The full details of these programmes andprojects will be tables and discussed later atTAG Session.

Chairman, once again I thank you for givingme the floor to present the Kiribati statement.

NEW CALEDONIA

Mr Chairman, distinguished Representatives ofMember Governments of the South Pacific Ap-plied Geoscience Commission, Representativesof regional and international organisations, MsDirector, dear Colleagues.

Thank you Mr Chairman for this opportunityto make a statement during the opening ses-sion, on behalf of the Government of New Cal-edonia.

Within the framework of the Nouméa Accord,that came into force on November 8th 1998, NewCaledonia, Associate Member of SOPAC since1991, wishes to maintain its collaboration withSOPAC. In order to neither overload the Secre-tariat nor diminish the resources of the othermember countries, New Caledonia has estab-lished an Associate Membership Work Pro-gramme with SOPAC for next year.

New Caledonia has recognised potential interms of mineral resources. The country is oneof the key players in the global nickel produc-tion as it is estimated to hold at least a quarterof the known world reserves. The country will,in a near future, become one of the world’s larg-est metallurgical producer of nickel. As Nickelmining remains the driving force of the territo-ry’s industrial development, environmentallysustainable mining techniques have been de-veloped over the last 25 years. Associated risksand impacts of mining have been minimized,allowing resource to be sustainably developedand managed.

Since 1997, New Caledonia has been involvedin mapping superficial geological formations,jointly with the “Bureau de RecherchesGéologiques et Minières” (B.R.G.M.). The result-ing maps will provide essential information forthe two ongoing environmentally-friendly min-ing projects in New Caledonia.

Offshore, the geological framework of the West-ern New Caledonia basins needs to be refined.Consequently, the main objectives of theZoNéCo 11 Multichannel seismic cruise cur-rently in progress will be to confirm : i) the likelythinned continental nature of the three offshorebasins, west of New Caledonia Mainland,through a seismic refraction survey : ii) theBottom Simulating Reflector-like reflector oc-currence and extension within those basins.

Finally, Mr Chairman, my delegation wishes thenew Director for her continued commitment toensure that the operation of the Organisationremains of the highest standard.

Thank you Mr Chairman.

PALAU

As newest member of SOPAC family. I though Iwill just observe the deliberations of this ses-sion and learn from the experiences of peoplearound the table, however, when my good friendand colleague from the Republic of MarshallIsland reminded me during last nights dinner,I guess one is enough but two is too much.

Once again the Republic of Palau had becomea member of other regional organisation(SPREP) without its presence at that meeting.

Honourable Chairperson, SOPAC Director andStaff, Distinguish Delegates, Ladies and Gen-tlemen.

I feel really honoured for this opportunity torepresent the Republic of Palau as a provisionalnational representative on this special occasionof the 33rd Annual Session.

This is special for Palau, since this is the firsttime for Palau to attend as a member of thisAugust body. So let me convey my country’smost sincere appreciation to the SOPAC Gov-erning Council for unanimously approved forPalau membership to SOPAC last year withoutPalau’s presence.

Palau sincerely apologies for that nonetheless,applaud the Governing Council gesture of Pa-cific brotherhood’s spirit of cooperation andsharing, where wealth and opportunities aregenerously shared.

70

Likewise may I also join other speakers inthanking the outgoing Chair, Niue and theGovernment of Papua New Guinea for hostingthis session in this beautiful island of Fiji.

Palau would also like to acknowledge the pres-ence of donor countries, representatives ofCROP, international organisations and insti-tutions who are with us in this meeting.

The Republic of Palau although just became amember last year as I mentioned, had in thepast provided with numerous technicalassistances and workshops by SOPAC andPalau is indebted and would like to express itsprofound appreciated to SOPAC Secretariatassistance throughout the years.

Palau, Mr Chairman, is fully aware of its lim-ited human and institutional capacities to prop-erly manage its limited resources and there-fore, looking forward believing, after observinglast few days of STAR presentations, thatSOPAC has the capacity, dedication and thecommitments to assist the Republic of Palauin achieving Palau’s short-comings, fundamen-tal for Palau to achieve sustainable develop-ments.

The capability to understand and implementsustainable development in our small islandstate, Mr Chairman, require short and longterm workshops and trainings and SOPAC havethe expertise in this effort.

Palau sets SOPAC as an efficient conduit forthe effective transfer of technologies to the is-land states.

Let me also take this opportunity and expressPalau’s appreciation to the donor countries andassure that Palau will as soon as possible payits require dues, fundamental to the health ofour organisation.

Finally, let me congratulate the new Directorof SOPAC and invite here to visit our region.

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

Introduction

Mr Chairman, your Excellency Alexis Maino,PNG High Commissioner to Fiji, Members ofthe Governing Council, Distinguished Repre-sentatives of Governments and Institutions ofmember countries, Distinguished Delegatesfrom Donor Governments and Agencies sup-porting SOPAC, Distinguished Guests, Direc-tor and staff of SOPAC Secretariat; ladies andgentlemen. On behalf of the PNG National Rep-

resentative to SOPAC, Secretary Kuma Aua,(OBE), the Government and people of PapuaNew Guinea, I wish to extend to you all ourwarmest greetings. We feel honored co-hostingthis 32nd Annual Session of SOPAC, gratefuland privilege for the favor to host it in Fiji.

Mr Chairman, the Papua New Guinea NationalRepresentative to SOPAC, Mr. Kuma Aua, hasexpressed his sincere apology and offered hisbest wishes, as he is currently committed toprogressing and monitoring the reorganizationof the Department of Mining into a statutoryauthority through to Cabinet and to overseerthe work done this month for the governmentto grant Mining Leases for three new mediumscale gold mines.

On behalf of the PNG delegation, historicallythe largest PNG has ever sent, I wish to ex-press our gratitude to the SOPAC Director andhis staff for making it possible for us to co-hostthis session. Mr Chairman, allow me to intro-duce the members of my delegation, KiukeNumoi, First Secretafy, PNG High Commission,Amo Mark, Deputy MD, PNG Water Board, JoeBuleka, Director, GSPNG, Lawrence Anton,Chief Seismologists, Nathan Mosusu, ChiefGeophysicist, Harry Kore, Senior Legal Officer,Department of Attorney General, BernardPawih, Deputy Secretary, Department of Petro-leum and Energy.

In retrospect, hosting the session in PNG thisweek would have coincided neatly with our 29th

anniversary of independence celebration. Ourinability to convene the session in PNG wasanticipated twelve months ago, stemming fromthe lack of progress on a submission to Gov-ernment to transform the Department of Min-ing into Mineral Resource Authority (MRA). Asan MRA we would have had the financial re-sources to convene the 32nd Annual Session inPNG.

Mr Chairman and Distinguished Representa-tives, on behalf of the National Representativeto SOPAC, I am relieved to announce that thir-teen days ago on Wednesday the 8th of Septem-ber, 2004 the Cabinet had approved the estab-lishment of the MRA and instructed the De-partment of Mining to complete in one month,all necessary administrative and legal documen-tation to establish both the MRA and a smallerDepartment of Mining that will maintain PolicyOffice and Geoharzards functions. FellowCouncil members, as a result of the approvalby the PNG Government for the Department ofMining to become an MRA, I am hopeful of amore active partnership with SOPAC Techni-cal Secretariat in years to come.

71

Partnership with SOPAC

PNG recognizes that SOPAC is an importantregional geoscientific organization and encour-ages it to remain in tune with member coun-try’s needs and donor countries’ funding re-quirements. We have no intention to demandreview of allocation of resources to accommo-date our elaborate project wish-list, however, Iwish to remind SOPAC that annual geologicalscience budget are increasingly becoming con-strained, and it is therefore necessary to main-tain a relevant regional organization.

Mr Chairman, the recent visit by the Directorof SOPAC to Port Moresby, coupled with theintroduction of the EU projects to representa-tives of relevant agencies of our Public Servicein PNG and the appointment of country in-tern,has certainly boost SOPAC’s profile in the PNGpublic service. PNG requests that the Directorof SOPAC includes annual visits to PNG as anactivity. It is our intention to co-partner SOPACin carrying out projects, as opposed to present-ing lists of projects for SOPAC to carry out, thusurge that the Director meets with us annuallyto discuss execution plans. The establishmentof a coordinator for the EU project in PNG (coun-try in-tern) conforms with the idea of a con-tinual SOPAC relevance in the country. We feelthat maintenance of SOPAC coordinator in PNGat the conclusion of the EU project is worthconsidering by our fellow Council Members.

Summary of Geological Resource Sector

Mr Chairman, let me comment on the Geologi-cal Sector. The PNG Country Report is di-vided into the following sectors; Mineral,Geothermal, Petroleum, Geological SurveyProjects and SOPAC EDF8 Project.

Mineral Sector

PNG is experiencing an upturn in explorationand related increase in receipt of the world-wide exploration dollar than it had experiencedbetween 2000 and 2001. As late as in August2003, PNG was ranked second mostunfavorable destination for exploration andMining.

However, recently the trend in applications forexploration licences has changed, with 36 newapplications approved for the first quarter of2004. It is expected that applications wouldincrease to about 43 by the end of the year.This is because the Government has adopted anumber of new incentives for investors, includ-

ing the abolition of additional Profit tax, (APT)double deduction of up to 200% of pre-produc-tion exploration costs, Ring Fencing of explo-ration costs up to 25% of a pool of explorationcosts provided the tax payable is not reducedby more then 25%.. Recent increase in explo-ration activities has placed a seven explorationlicences and prospects at advanced stages,namely:

• Ramu Nickel and Cobalt

• Frieda/Nena Copper and Gold

• Hidden Valley Gold

• Simberi Gold

• Mt. Sinivit Gold

• Wafi Gold

• Golpu Copper Prospect

A mining lease was granted to Highlands Pa-cific Limited to develop the Kainantu under-ground gold mine in June 2002. Negotiationscontinued in 2003 and the Project MOA andCompensation Agreements were executed inDecember 2003. Construction of this under-ground mine has commenced production isexpected in January 2005.

The construction of the Ramu nickel/cobaltproject has been delayed since 2000 becauseof very high capital cost and low nickel pricethen, and lack of progress to secure a thirdjoint venture partner. The China MetallurgicalConstruction Group Corporation (MCC) is ex-pected to form part of the venture and will ac-quire about 85% interest in the project andwill fund the total US$650 million for theProject.

Mining products maintained their position asthe leading primary export commodity of PNGand also remains a significant contributor ofabout 17 percent to the Gross Domestic Prod-uct (GDP). The mineral product exports ac-counted for 52 percent of total exports in 2003.The focus in mining now in PNG is on efficiencyand cost cutting to enhance revenues and pro-duction in the future. The production figuresfor the following operating mines are brieflyoutlined below:

Ok Tedi – A total of 16 tonnes of gold and202000 tonnes of copper were produced by OkTedi Mine in 2003. However, in 2004, as aresult of technical disruptions at Ok Tedi theproduction of Copper concentrate was signifi-cantly reduced for the first half of 2004. Asattend June 2004, 108,902 tonnes of Copper,7,852kg of gold and 17,362 kg of Silver wereproduced. Reduction in production may beexperienced by the mine due to the present EL

72

Nino impact on the Fly River that is causingshipping and delivery difficulties.

Porgera – Porgera Mine produced 26.5 tonnesof gold in 2003. Total proven and probablemineral reserves at the end of 2003 for Porgeragold mine was 48.85 million tonnes grading at3.4g/t gold, which equates to 5.391million con-tained ounces of gold and a projected mine lifeof 9 years. Production to the end of June 2004was 15,765 kgs of gold and 2,944 kg silver,which puts Porgera on target to exceed 1mil-lion ounces for 2004.

Lihir – The mine produced 18.7 tonnes of goldin 2003. Gold production in the first half of2004 was affected by a scheduled 10-day plantshut down and an additional 20 day lost as aresult of the main oxygen plant failure. How-ever production to the end of June was 8,629kg(dore) of gold, indicating the mine is likely toproduce a little over 600,000 ounces of gold for2004. The high gains are being made in min-ing and processing operations and from fore-casted higher grades.

Misima Gold Mine – A total of 3.762 tones ofgold was produced by Misima Mine in 2003using the stockpiled low grade ore. The Minesclosed its operations on 26 May 2004. Currentactivities on Misima Mine relate to mine clo-sure and rehabilitation.

Tolukuma Gold Mine – A total of 2.522 tonnesof gold mainly was produced by this underground mine in 2003. The mine produced 1.339kg of gold and 2,647kg of Silver at the end ofJune 2004. The increased productions wereattributed to higher grade, better planning andgood mining practices. In 2004 a production of7000 ounces per month has been the target.

Petroleum Sector

Mr Chairman, Petroleum exploration was at itspeak with a total of 40 Petroleum ProspectingLicenses in 1990 but this has been reduced toabout 15 PPL. A total of 11 new applicationshave been received and are at various stagesof licence processing. Two exploration wells arecurrently active and at this time PPL-219 isbeing tested. The present four producing wellsand a gas well are summarized below:

Kutubu Oil Project – Kutubu Oil Project com-menced production in 1991 and up to the endof June 2003, over 279,074 MBBLS and737,131.360 million standard cubic feet(MMSCF) gas has been extracted. The averagemonthly production figures for July 2004 wasat 17732.00 BBLS.

Gobe Oil Project – Gobe Oil Project commencedproduction in 1998 and has so far produced434,646 MBBLO and 2,288,161 MSCF gas upto June 2003. Production figures for Gobeduring the month of July 2004 was at 11,438.00BBL.

Moran Oil Project – Moran Oil Project com-menced production in 1998 and has produced20,908 MBBO at the end of June 2003. Pro-duction figure for the month of July 2004 wasat 12,044 BBLO.

Hides Gas Project – Hides Gas Project exploitsa large onshore gas field, which commencedproduction in 1991 and to date produced46,727 MMSCF gas with an average monthlyproduction of 447 MCF including sales toPorgera Gold Mine for electricity generation. Asmall volume of condensate is refined on siteas diesel fuel for local consumption.

Napa Napa Refinery – The Napa Napa Oil Re-finery was the first downstream petroleumproject to be granted a Petroleum ProcessingFacility License by the Government in Febru-ary 2000. Inter Oil was awarded the contractand engineering design, procurement and con-struction have been completed. The first oilentered the refinery on 30th of June 2004 witha total output of 32,500 barrels per day. Au-gust 12th 2004 has been marked as first timeday of shipment of refined products for the lo-cal PNG market.

Geothermal Energy

Mr Chairman, the geothermal energy has beenlisted hereunder separately because of its enor-mous potential and renewed resource interestin PNG. Foreign organizations have shown someinterest in this resource recently and have hadsome discussions with local industries andGovernment officials in PNG. GSPNG has takensteps to liaised with external donors and agen-cies for assistance in funding equipment toexplore and document the geothermal resourcesfollowing a UNDP funded project in 2003 for areview of our existing database on geothermalresources.

Lihir Gold Mine has constructed the first 6MWgeothermal plant in PNG to supplement elec-tricity power generation for its mining opera-tions and 35 MW plant is being constructionfor operations in early 2005 for the future min-ing operations. A number of Provincial Gov-ernments are thinking of investing in this in-dustry and a survey is being planned to tie inthe gaps in our records.

73

Other Projects

The five year World Bank Mining Sector Insti-tutional Strengthening Project aimed atstrengthening the institutional capacity of De-partment of Mining (DoM) and the InternalRevenue Commission (IRC) has progressedwell. The technical assistances are provided inthe following areas:

1. Policy and Regulatory

2. Exploration and Mining audits

3. Mineral Tenements Management Compo-nent

4. Sustainable Development Component

5. Geological Survey and Development of GIScapabilities

6. Capacity Building for Internal RevenueCommission.

This Project will end in September 2005.

Sysmin – EU Grant

A grant of 50 million Euros for institutionalcapacity upgrade project was signed in July2002. It was provided as a result of the effect ofthe 1997 drought on the mining sector. TheEU Sysmin Grant will address and provide theassistance in the following main areas:

1. Independent Deep Sea Tailing Placement

2. Building New Purposed-Built DepartmentBuilding

3. Establishment of Small Scale Mining Vo-cational Centres

4. Airborne Geophysical Survey of the PNGHighlands and Huon Peninsula.

5. Geological Mapping and Mineral PotentialAssessment of the PNG Highlands.

6. Formulation o a Mining Waste ManagementPolicy.

7. Hardware Procurement to DoM

8. Geological and Mineral Resources Informa-tion System

Mining Resource Authority (M.R.A.) is one maincomponent and has a bearing on the two mainGeological and Geophysical Components thatare expected to add new raw data and increaseexploration potential to PNG. The process ofconverting the Mining Department into an Au-thority was a special condition imposed by theEuropean Union to allow the release of almost70% of the total Euro 50 million of funds Air-borne Geophysical Survey and Geological Map-ping and Mineral Potential Assessment. Thiscondition has now been met by the Govern-

ment with the approval on 8/9/04 by Cabineton the MRA Submission.

PNG has recently formed a Delimitation Work-ing Group to look into the Extended Continen-tal Shelf Proposal. The Working Group meet-ing has proposed resurvey for the base pointsand Commonwealth Secretariat has respondedand assisted.

Geological Hazards and Monitoring

PNG has received considerable benefit in thepast from the assistance of SOPAC in efforts tomitigate the effects of natural disasters. Thereis a need to increase awareness to save cost inall sectors in order to bring real developmentto the rural population. It is sincerely hopedthat this co-operation will continue and the EUEDF8/SOPAC Project is expected to acceleratedisaster awareness and save lives. Funds canbe saved by collaboration and real rural devel-opment can eventuate and we are eager to ad-vance this project in PNG.

Mr Chairman, PNG has experienced severaldamaging natural disasters in the recent past.GSPNG has been involved in carrying out as-sessments and investigations into some of thesedisasters. However, much work and ongoingobservations have been severely constrained byfinancial difficulties and lack of appropriateequipment. Port of Lae City for example, re-mained on the SOPAC agenda, awaiting anothersubmarine or terrestrial landslide. SOPAC isrequested to assist in the data collection as partof the Lae City Project.

Regional Geoscience Mapping

Chair, GSPNG has conducted Component 5 ofthe World Bank Project Geological SurveyStrengthening in Wau-Bulolo area. This areawas originally selected because of the past al-luvial gold rush and present high concentra-tion of grass root mining and the fieldwork wasaimed at assisting to increase output of goldproduction and revenue to PNG. Detailed geo-logical mapping and re-interpretation of thegeology has been completed and a report is inprogress. The report when completed will formpart of the databank required in order to lurein investment to PNG. This is part of our Stra-tegic Planning (big picture) to increase explo-ration and revenue for the country. We hopegeological mapping and groundtruthing of theremotely sensed data will increase our explo-ration potential complimented by aeromagneticSurvey in the near future.

74

We believe the conversion of the Departmentinto an Authority will see most of our strategicplanning work materialising with added fund-ing and human resources, the two main re-sources areas that the Department and theGovernment of PNG has suffered for a long time.

Thank you Mr Chairman.

SAMOA

The Samoan Representative briefly addressedCouncil, congratulating the new Director uponher leadership of her team of staff which shewas sure would steer the Secretariat to ablyservice the needs and priorities of the membercountries. She acknowledged the benefits toSamoa of SOPAC assistance highlighting thegood applied science, training and capacity-building opportunities in earth sciences andcoastal morphological mapping, energy andseabed mapping to name a few. She expressedSamoa’s wish for more training in disastermanagement and hydrology and concluded bythanking the donor community for their con-tribution to the region and to Samoa.

SOLOMON ISLANDS

Chairman, thank you for the opportunity tomake representation of my delegation fromSolomon Islands at the opening of this 33rd

Annual Session of SOPAC.

I on behalf of my delegation representing thegood people of Solomon Islands at this 33rd

SOPAC Annual Session would at this outsetcongratulate you (PNG) on your appointmentfor chairmanship at this occasion and forSOPAC in the next year cycle. We do look for-ward to your leadership, guidance and facilita-tion of deliberation in the next few days of thissession and move so for the SOPAC organisa-tion in the next year of Programmes.

I would also like to thank the outgoing Chair(Niue) for the services rendered to SOPAC dur-ing the last year period.

To the hosting country, of this 33rd SOPAC Ses-sion, Papua New Guinea, I extend my delega-tions sincere expression of gratitude for cater-ing for this important annual occasion ofSOPAC, this year 2004. I note that this occa-sion should have been hosted in your beautifulcountry of PNG, but for reasons, you have seenit fit to convene this 33rd SOPAC Session herein Warwick, Fiji.

To the SOPAC Secretariat, I on behalf of mydelegation convey our most profound apprecia-tion for the services rendered to the region andmove specifically to Solomon Islands during thelast year period, although noted to be minimal.

My special thanks is extended to the Director,Ms Cristelle Pratt, within your first few monthsof assumption of the Directors position had seenit fit to make a visit to us. Solomon Islands inJune 2004. I do hope that you witnessed foryourself the situation where we are in now af-ter the troubles of the past years.

Chairman, I am pleased to report to this gath-ering that the Law and order situation in Solo-mon Islands had improved greatly and a senseof normalcy had returned. This has been so bythe good efforts of the Regional Assistance Mis-sion to Solomon Islands, RAMSI – “HelpfemFren” led by Australia. To you all fellow coun-try delegates of countries who participated inMission to Solomon Islands, I extend the peo-ple of Solomon Islands most profound grati-tude for the services and assistance provided.Without the help under the Mission, our fu-ture would be unknown.

Chairman, Solomon Islands still considersSOPAC an important regional inter-governmentgeoscience resource organisation. We value verymuch our association with SOPAC because weview SOPAC’s work programes as complemen-tary to our national goals and programmes ingeology, minerals, water, energy, hazards andrelated environmental geosciences.

Our commitment to SOPAC will and will alwaysbe there. This is proven by continual attend-ance at the SOPAC annual meetings despitethe problems and difficulties of the past fouryears and non-payment of 4 years arrears ofannual contributions.

I am to inform that Solomon Islands is com-mitted to fulfil its obligations to pay-up its an-nual contribution to SOPAC, hopeful before theend of this year.

At this juncture may I take this opportunity toall donor countries organisation and individualscientists/others who had supported SOPACin whatever form during the last year period. Ido look forward to your continual help and sup-port in the next year.

Chairman, thank you and I thank you all foryour attention and I wish you all a good, happyand successful 33rd Annual Session.

75

TONGA

Mr. Chairman, SOPAC Governing Council Mem-bers, Representatives of Governments Regionaland International Institutions, DistinguishedScientists and SOPAC Advisers, Director andStaff of the Secretariat, Friends and Support-ers of SOPAC, Ladies and Gentlemen:

It is indeed a great honour for me and my del-egation to be here in the Coral Coast, repre-senting the Government and people of the King-dom of Tonga in the 33rd Annual Session ofSOPAC Governing Council. Your Excellency, wewould love it if this “one in a lifetime event”were hosted within the golden shores of PapuaNew Guinea. This would enable us to see andwitness the beauty and friendliness of the “Birdsof Paradise”.

However, on this very important occasion, ourdelegation wishes to join hand in hand withmy other colleagues in congratulating YourExcellency on your new appointment as Chair-person of the 33rd Annual Session and furtherassuming the leadership of SOPAC GoverningCouncil for the next twelve months to come.Mr. Chairman, we have the fullest confidencein your leadership and we trust that Your Ex-cellency’s years of experience in diplomatic ac-tivities would guide us smoothly along the“bumpy and boggy road to success.” FurtherMr. Chairman, our delegation would also liketo offer our most sincere appreciation to Niueas the outgoing Chairperson for her efficientleadership and guidance of the GoverningCouncil over the past twelve months, despiteher many commitments to the people and Gov-ernment of Niue, in trying to recover the wholeIsland from the devastating effects of “TropicalCyclone Heta”.

Mr. Chairman, unlike in previous years, theTongan Delegation has come to this AnnualSession with a renewed sense of dedication andcommitment to work closely with SOPAC Sec-retariat in order to carryout some of the activi-ties that had been prioritized and placed underour Tasks Profile for many years. AlthoughTonga has looked at SOPAC as an importantimplementation partner for its sustainable de-velopment projects, Tonga for many years, hasfailed to attract the Secretariat’s fullest engage-ments.

However, over the last twelve months we havesighted a marked improvement on the overallperformance of the SOPAC Secretariat on theactivities under our Tasks Profile. It is pleasingto report that the commitments made by SOPACSecretariat to implement activities, identified

under our Tasks Profile as priority areas, wereexecuted at their highest level of achievementsas compared to those made over the last fiveyears. It is our wish and hope that the Secre-tariat will continue providing the same serv-ices in years to come so as to restore back ourfullest confidence and commitment on the abili-ties and capabilities of our beloved organiza-tion, SOPAC.

Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to prolong mystatement any longer, since there will be moreappropriate time for me later to raise furtherissues when we go through each of the meet-ing’s agenda items, on the next few days of ourdeliberation. However, it would be remiss onmy part, not to thank various donor agencies,scientific organizations, friends and support-ers that have generously contributed and con-tinued to provide assistance in some way oranother to implementation of SOPAC work pro-grams. Without the sustained support, it wouldbe difficult to expect the Secretariat to fulfill itsmandate from the Council.

Last but not the least, my delegation would alsolike to extend our deepest appreciation to theDirector and Staff of the Secretariat for the ef-forts they have made during the past twelvemonths. Without your loyalty and dedication,this meeting may not be possible.

‘Ofa atu, Malo ‘aupito.

TUVALU

Mr Chairman, Distinguish National Representa-tives, Director and staff of SOPAC, Donor Agen-cies, Ladies and Gentlemen.

Thank you Mr Chairman for the opportunitygiven to me to present Tuvalu statement at thisopening session. Let me firstly extend our ap-preciation and gratitude to the Government andpeople of Niue, as outgoing Host Country fortheir good guidance even at time of disaster.Our prayers and well wishes go to the people ofNiue as they are recuperating and recoveringfrom the damages of the cyclone. On behalf ofthe Government of Tuvalu, I would like to con-gratulate you Mr. Chairman for your new rolein chairing this annual session.

Tuvalu recognizes the ongoing activities car-ried out by SOPAC which covers a wide spec-trum of field. As we meet today, SOPAC char-tered survey vessel Turagalevu is soldiering-on with the Tuvalu Marine and Field Surveyunder the EU EDF8 Project. This is a classicexample of SOPAC dedication and commitment

76

to assist its members. For delegates’ informa-tion, the tasks involve: –

1. Marine Survey

• bathymetric survey of all nine islands ofTuvalu

• seabed bathymetry of risk area (wave surgeAugust 2002) on Funafuti

• surveys of proposed sites for bridge/ cause-way on Nanumea & Vaitupu

• survey of proposed ramp site for Niutao

2. Water and Sanitation

• water resource survey on Fualefeke &Tepuka

• advise on water sources on Vaitupu

• advise watertanks on Nui & Nanumaga

• sampling of saltwater/ saline intrusion inPulaka Pits on Niutao & Nui

• avise(NMDO) on drought back- up” systemsfor Nukufetau, Niutao, Nanumea & Vaitupu

3. Risk Analysis [NMDO] – emergency (cy-clone) communications for Niulakita &Nukulaelae

• emergency (cyclone) communications forNiulakita & Nukulaelae

4. Aggregates & Coastal Processes

5. GIS & Remote Sensing

Mr Chairman, Tuvalu hopes that findings fromthe survey will provide solutions to areas ofnational concern. The results from the surveywill be utilized as strong decision- making toolat different levels in the country. We will beable to comment further on these findings wellafter the survey. On behalf of the Governmentof Tuvalu, I would like to thank SOPAC withthe implementation of the Marine and Fieldsurvey.

Like other developing nations, resources andtechnology constraints in Tuvalu are regardedas hurdles to our developments and progress.Contributions of SOPAC through its three mainCore Divisions; Community Lifelines, Commu-nity Risk, and Oceans & Islands fortunatelyhelps us with technical and scientific needs.Quality and efficient roles of SOPAC in the re-gion are reflected by good coordination and com-munication between administration and sup-porting managers. Quality Assurance, Pro- Ac-tive approach and other similar slogans are

fairly new in the Tuvalu context, in terms ofmonitoring the progress of developments andprojects. Tuvalu would like to be part of theteam with assistance from SOPAC to make surethat every project are monitored thoroughlyfrom start to the end. Extended review periodsand follow- ups by SOPAC in terms of countryvisits is recommended to make sure that theprojects are successfully implemented and thatthey also meet their objectives.

Mr. Chairman, before I came to this meeting, Iwas asked to follow up with SOPAC on the fol-lowing areas:

1. Finalization of Tuvalu Maritime Boundarywith her neighbors and outcome of inde-pendent verification of data by GeoscienceAustralia.

2. Acquisition & geo- referencing of IKONOSsatellite images.

3. Review the status of Tuvalu EVI.

Mr. Chairman, Tuvalu values the support pro-vided by SOPAC through Fellowship Attach-ments and In-country workshops.

Finally Mr. Chairman, I wish to welcome youas Chair, and sincere thanks to the outgoingChair of Niue for her role. Through you MrChairman, I wish to specially congratulate theDirector of SOPAC in her first year in office,and her staff for their excellent effort in theimplementation of the Tuvalu Marine and Fieldsurvey. I also like to thank the Government ofPapua New Guinea for hosting this meeting,and of course the Government and friendlypeople of Fiji for this wonderful venue.

Last but not least, Tuvalu would like to thankthe Donor Agencies for their ongoing supportin the region. It would not be possible to carryout SOPAC activities in the region without yourcontinuous support.

Fakafetai Lasi

VANUATU

Vanuatu would like to join others in thankingthe outgoing chair for the services renderedduring the past 12 months and likewise con-gratulate the Ambassador of Papua New Guineato Fiji for his election as the chairman for thissession. We would also like to convey, throughyou Mr Chairman, our sincere gratitude to theGovernment of Papua New Guinea for hostingthis 33rd SOPAC Annual Session.

77

We see this session as very important since theSecretariat and its future program will be dis-cussed and determined by the Council mem-bers.

Due to other important commitments and otherdevelopments taking place in our country, ourNational Rep is unable to attend the 33rd An-nual Council Meeting. He however wishes theGoverning Council well in its deliberations.

Vanuatu would like to commend the Secretariatfor its technical accomplishments during 2003/2004 work programme year. An account leveland amount will be reserved and discussed inthe work programmes agenda. In particular,we note that the European Union project andthe Disaster risk programme activities havebeen the most active programme in the coun-try.

In next year’s program we place our prioritieson tasks relating to Minerals, Maritime Delimi-tation Boundaries & Application for the Exten-sion of Continental shelf, Institutional Strength-ening and Capacity building in the area of Dis-aster/Risk Management, poverty alleviation,the EU ITC centre establishments and its op-eration and the Human resources development.

In closing, we thank the donor governmentsand agencies who have continued to fundSOPAC work programs implemented in ourcountry. We note that there are approved out-standing tasks that are yet to be undertakenbut could not be executed which maybe due tounforeseen circumstance faced by the coun-try. In this context we request that these tasksbe reconsidered in the next years programme.

Thank you.

PART II: STATEMENTS BY CROP ORGANISATIONS

PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUMSECRETARIAT

• I would like if I may to take this opportu-nity to update you on recent developmentsof the Pacific Plan:

¤ Which, as I’m sure you are all aware bynow, aims to create stronger and deeperlinks between Pacific Island Countries; andto identify the sectors where the region cangain the most from sharing resources ofgovernance and aligning policies. I amgrateful to the High Commissioner and theDirector for referring to it so comprehen-sively this morning.

• At the Pacific Islands Forum meeting lastmonth in Apia, Leaders reinforced their in-tention for the Plan to be the main instru-ment for promoting their Pacific Vision ‘sothat its people can lead free and worthwhilelives.’

¤ The aim is to deliver real benefits forthe people of the Pacific by proposing con-crete plans for the enhancement of eco-nomic growth, sustainable development,good governance and security – the key coregoals of the Forum.

¤ It will also be used as a springboard forstimulating debate on how to shape the re-gion’s longer-term future.

¤ This should mark a new era, histori-cally speaking for the Pacific, requiring dif-ferent kinds of responses in the region.

• The concept of the Pacific Plan arose fromthe Special Leaders’ Retreat in Aucklandin April this year where Leaders consideredthe Eminent Persons’ Group Review of theForum - the first to be conducted in its 30-odd years of existence.

¤ At that meeting, Leaders issued theAuckland Declaration, stating that the se-rious challenges facing the countries of thePacific required the careful and serious ex-amination of the pooling of scarce regionalresources to strengthen national capacities.

• The Pacific Plan will be carried forward bythe Forum Secretariat as a dynamic andmulti-layered process evolving over anumber of years:

¤ Designed to improve cooperation in keysectors, to provide efficiencies in the wayregional organisations interact and to be-gin harmonising a range of administrativeand other processes.

• A Working Group chaired by the Secretari-at’s Deputy Secretary General and callingon expert support from key regional agen-cies including SOPAC, SPREP SPC andUSP, prepared a framework for the Apiameeting for the development of the PacificPlan, along with an assessment of the cur-rent state of our regional cooperation.

• At the Apia Forum, Leaders approved theTerms of Reference for preparation of thePlan and noted that there would be an ex-tensive but necessary consultation proc-ess through the coming year.

78

¤ The people of the Pacific must feel astrong sense of ownership of the design andimplementation of the Pacific Plan. It is,after all, supposed to serve their best in-terests and it will have failed if it does notdo that. We therefore see the Plan as beingthe product of as wide a consultation proc-ess as we can achieve.

¤ The degree of buy-in will be critical - onthe basis of my consultations around theregion , there is unquestionably enthusi-asm for moving forward, although this en-thusiasm is in couched in fairly generalterms.

¤ The next year will tell us a lot abouthow far and how fast regional countries areprepared to go.

• The Pacific Plan Task Force, held its firstmeeting at the end of August at the Secre-tariat Headquarters in Suva.

¤ The Task Force is made up of seniorofficial representatives from all Forumcountries.

¤ And representatives from CROP organi-sations including the Forum Secretariat,SPC, USP, SOPAC and SPREP.

• The Task Force agreed on an action planfor development of the Pacific Plan.

¤ Initially, it is looking at vital sector bysector cooperation and at harmonising,where possible, processes and proceduresas the means by which the best coopera-tion among our regional organisationsmight be guaranteed.

¤ We will be looking to produce earlygains, or ‘low hanging fruit’ where we can,both for their own sake, and as a means ofmaintaining momentum.

¤ We will also be producing a more gen-eral framework, proposals for how we mighttake matters further.

– that is, clearly, a very important aspectof the work if we are thinking, as I thinkwe must, about taking our cooperation tonew levels, conceptually speaking.

¤ In any event, we need to produce a sub-stantial outcome for the Leaders at their2005 meeting – an outcome which makespractical advances and gives them a basisfor judgement about how they might wantto further the process.

• Some of the early initiatives being consid-ered are in specific areas of concern for:

¤ SOPAC, These include: setting up ef-fective national mechanisms to ensure ef-fective participation in and support of re-gional cooperation (a very significant mat-ter, this, and one that, as I think we allknow, we shall have to tackle in a concertedway); regional support for countries inmeeting their reporting responsibilities tofulfil international reporting requirements;custodianship and maintenance of all re-gional statistics, across all sectors to un-derpin high quality research to supporthigh quality research and give us a bettersense of how we are fairing; drafting re-gional model legislation and support regu-lation in respect of land management, pro-prietary rights for genetic resources and themining of aggregates; early warning and re-sponse systems for natural disasters; andhelping with implementation of existingpolicy commitments on the Pacific OceanPolicy and Action Plan, Standards for Min-ing and Mineral Exploration (marine &land), the Pacific Islands Energy Policy &Plan (PIEPP), the Pacific Regional ActionPlan on Sustainable Water Management(Pacific RAP), and waste & pollution man-agement.

• What does the Pacific Plan - this new ap-proach to development in the region - meanmore broadly for regional organisations?

¤ A new CROP Charter prepared by theCROP Heads was provided to Leaders inApia.. Its aim is to engender closer, moreeffective levels of cooperation among theexisting regional organisations.

¤ The importance of getting the best outof the CROP mechanism is, in the contextof the Pacific Plan, I think, very clear. Wehave taken some steps in this regard. Ithink though that the comments made bythe outgoing Chair this morning throwslight on aspects of the task before us. Weas a collective simply have to get better atit.

• Regional cooperation in the Pacific has hadits successes, no doubt, and it has been aprocess without which the region may wellhave been considerably worse off.

¤ Most recently, cooperation in securityareas has improved significantly, as it hasin trade. Sectoral cooperation in areas likehealth, education, fisheries has likewiseproduced some good results and there issome prospect for useful collaboration inaviation.

79

¤ But, while we have already been mov-ing in that cooperative direction in manyways, the new Leaders’ Vision for the Planrepresents a much stronger directive tomove beyond the present boundaries.

¤ We need to take advantage of the re-gion’s interconnectedness and to find newand creative ways of harnessing those col-lective capacities.

• Regional organisations, of course, have akey leadership role to play in developmentof the Pacific Plan.

¤ But beyond that, we do need to keepvery much in mind that there are a lot ofresources tied up in these organisationsand it is our fundamental duty to see thatthose resources are put to the best andmost efficient possible use on behalf of theregion’s people.

¤ And we will have continued support inthis from many of our partners – the re-cently launched EPA negotiations with theEU will, for example, strongly complementthe new regional integration objectives. Weshall be seeking to enter into substantivediscussions shortly, in the same vein, withthe ADB, UNDP and other agencies.

• The Pacific Plan should then be seen as,essentially, the script which we regionalpublic servants must work to.

¤ More particularly, the Pacific Planpresents regional agencies with a uniqueopportunity in the drivers’ seat of regionaldevelopment at the broadest level.

• The Pacific Plan is a large, if not daunting,undertaking involving a lot of discussionand as many Pacific people as possible.

¤ We are talking about a process as muchas an outcome and regional institutions willneed to remain centrally involved.

• All rhetoric aside, the future really is to playfor and our people must be permitted toplay for it.

¤ We know the challenges – we work andlive with them every day.

¤ But we all need to be discussing, as in-tensively as we can, the issues the regionfaces and the opportunities it may graspin the context of the new Pacific Plan.

¤ I encourage you to do that.

SECRETARIAT OF THE PACIFICCOMMUNITY

Mr Chairman, Honoured Delegates, Directorand Staff of SOPAC, Heads of International andRegional Organisations, Development Partners,Observers, Ladies and Gentlemen....

Mr Chairman, allow me first of all, to congratu-late you for chairing this 33rd Annual Sessionof the SOPAC Governing Council. Thank youfor the opportunity to make a brief statementon behalf of the Secretariat of the Pacific Com-munity. My Director General who unfortunatelycannot be here sends her warmest regards andbest wishes for a very successful Council meet-ing.

Mr Chairman, I begin my remarks by congratu-lating Ms Cristelle Pratt, who is leading theSOPAC team to this 33rd Annual Session of theSOPAC Council for the first time in her capac-ity as the Director of SOPAC. I wish to registerat the outset that SPC accords great value tothe work SOPAC does in our common membercountries and territories and will continue tocollaborate closely with SOPAC in areas thatlend themselves to joint programming ap-proaches.

The SPC has enjoyed a very good working rela-tionship with SOPAC over the past few years.It has been a rewarding experience working withan organisation that shares a common visionof ‘excellence of service’ to its membership.

In our statement to the 32nd Annual Session ofCouncil held in Niue last year, we expressedSPC’s strong belief in a “ ‘strategic, collabora-tive approach’ and partnership between regionalorganizations in responding to, and address-ing important priorities of our respective mem-ber countries and territories”. Mr Chairman, anumber of opportunities occurred this year thatclearly demonstrated this vision. I note thatmany of them are covered in papers for thismeeting, and pooling of resources and exper-tise between regional organizations, where bothSOPAC and SPC participated in are as follows:

• CROP Remunerations Review. SOPAC,PIFS, SPC, SPREP, FFA, SPBEA partici-pated in the Working Group established byFOC last year, which endeavour to harmo-nise the terms and conditions for remu-neration for staff working in CROP organi-zations.

• The Pacific Plan. SOPAC, SPC, USP andSPREP assisted the Forum Secretariat inmuch of the Pre-Forum sector analysiswork to identify areas of existing regional

80

cooperation, gaps, and areas for furtherdeeper and broader cooperation. Post Fo-rum, SOPAC, SPC, SPREP, USP continueto be part of the Pacific Plan Taskforce todevelop the Pacific Plan being led and co-ordinated by PIFS Secretary General.

• The new CROP Charter. Forum IslandLeaders called for a new CROP charter thatmore clearly delineate its role, the workingrelationships between member organiza-tions, and the role of the PIFS SecretaryGeneral as the permanent Chair of CROP.The new CROP Charter approved by Lead-ers in Apia was the outcome of the CROPHeads deliberations on July in this year inPort Vila, hosted by USP, at their Emaluscampus.

At the organisational level, SOPAC and SPChave great potential for even closer collabora-tion in some areas of their respective work pro-grammes. Such areas include, but are not lim-ited to:

• The SOPAC and SPC GIS programmes.Both SOPAC and SPC run GIS activities inrespective areas under their mandates.Closer collaboration between these cur-rently separate GIS programmes couldprobably add value to each other’s utilityand the end users of these systems at thenational levels. In addition, the SOPAC GISprogramme could also be very helpful forthe work of the SPC land Resources Divi-sion covering both agriculture and forestry.

• SOPAC’s work on coastal zone and con-tinental shelf and boundaries and thework of the SPC’s Marine Resources Di-vision covering its coastal and oceanicfisheries programmes and maritime pro-gramme. There is potential for closer anddeeper collaboration and sharing of re-sources in these programme areas.

At the executive management level, SPC hascontinued to enjoy the exchange of ideas, in-formation and strategic organisational issueswith SOPAC. SPC has the pleasure of invitingthe previous director of SOPAC twice to par-ticipate at its annual executive retreat as animportant way of sharing information and ideas.This is an opportunity SPC would like to alsoextend to the new director of SOPAC commenc-ing at our next executive retreat, which will beheld in Fiji in the first quarter of 2005.

One important area of mutual interest toSOPAC, SPC and SPTO is the Pacific VillageProject, which is the combined office complexthat will house the headquarters for SOPAC andSPTO, and the Regional Office of SPC in Fiji.This project has been on the drawing board for

a few years, but it is now looking likely, thatthis project will come to fruition in the not toodistant future. I am sure, the delegate from Fijiwill update this meeting on the progress of thePacific Village Project to date.

Mr Chairman, I now wish to conclude by mostsincerely thanking your government for host-ing this 33rd Annual Session of the SOPAC Gov-erning Council, and you for giving the oppor-tunity to share these thoughts on behalf of SPC.

May God guide and richly bless you all.

SECRETARIAT FOR THE PACIFICREGIONAL ENVIRONMENTPROGRAMME

Mr Chairman, Excellencies, distinguished del-egates, representatives of sister CROP agencies,ladies and gentlemen – it gives me great pleas-ure to attend this SOPAC Annual Session forthe second time and to present a statement fromSPREP.

Mr Chairman, SPREP has just completed its15th SPREP Meeting and the 5th EnvironmentMinisters’ Forum in French Polynesia. Amongthe key outcomes of these two meetings wasthe approval of a name change to the organiza-tion. Rather than the South Pacific RegionalEnvironment Programme, the organization isnow called the Pacific Regional EnvironmentProgramme. The Secretariat to the organiza-tion is now the Secretariat of the Pacific Re-gional Environment Programme thus still re-taining the SPREP acronym. These two meet-ings Mr Chairman also approved SPREP’s Ac-tion Plan for 2005-2009 and our Strategic Pro-grammes for the next ten years (2004-2013),along with a realigned secretariat structure.These two key documents Mr Chairman, re-flects the needs and priorities of our membercountries, donors and partners and how theywant SPREP to carry out the promotion of thesustainable stewardship of the region’s envi-ronment. More importantly, Mr Chairman,SPREP’s Action Plan captures the new PacificVision that was adopted by the Forum Leaderslast year.

The new Pacific Vision, Mr Chairman, calls forcloser and stronger collaboration among CROPagencies and their member countries, donors,the civil society and partners and friends of theregion. Already, SPREP has committed its re-sources and expertise to the Task Force whichhas been assigned with drafting the Pacific Plan– the main instrument for promoting the newPacific Vision.

81

I am happy to report that SPREP through theCROP Sustainable Development Working Groupis working side-by-side with other sister CROPagencies, particularly the Forum Secretariat,SOPAC, SPC and USP, in providing technicalassistance to PICs through their national sum-mits, the drafting of their National SustainableDevelopment Strategies, as well asparticipations in their donor round tables. FSMand Kiribati have completed their National Sus-tainable Development Strategies. Tuvalu andthe Cook Islands are in the process of or closeto drafting their National Sustainable Develop-ment Strategies. We are looking towards as-sisting those of our members, upon request,who have yet to undertake this important ex-ercise as a commitment towards engenderingsustainable development for our island states– a commitment our Leaders made in Johan-nesburg two years ago. More recently, we madeavailable one of our experts to participate inthe team that was mandated by the ForumLeaders to work with the Government of Nauruto develop a proposal on how the Forum couldassist them through their current economiccrisis. I intentionally mentioned these Mr Chair-man, to demonstrate the priority that SPREPplaces on Small Island States and it is my fer-vent wish that, with all our effective collabora-tions, the Republic of Nauru will be able tobounce back from the doldrums they are cur-rently under.

The inter-linkages between the activities ofSPREP and other sister CROP agencies, SOPACincluded, is a fact of life. SPREP is committedto the CROP and its working group process toensure effective coordination and the most ef-ficient use of resources for the highest returnto the people we jointly serve. I am happy MrChairman to report on the fruitful interactionsthat the two organizations have had in the Sus-tainable Development Working Group, the En-ergy Working Group, the Information and Com-munication Technology Working Group, theMarine Sector Working Group and the CROPUN Millennium Development Goals WorkingGroup. On specific activities Mr Chairman,Climate Change is one of the areas that thetwo organizations are working together on. Iam happy to note the interactions in the Fo-rum-established Ad-hoc Working Group on Cli-mate Change and the representation of SOPACin the Project Advisory Committee of our cli-mate change mitigation initiative called thePacific Islands Renewable Energy Project orPIREP. Speaking of the PIREP Mr Chairman, Iappreciate that this initiative cuts through bothSPREP’s climate change programme and theenergy-related activities of the members of theCROP Energy Working Group. I am therefore

committed Mr Chairman to ensure that whileSPREP is and will continue to be the executionagency of this climate change initiative, theimplementation will be done in collaborationwith SOPAC’s energy programme as well asthose of other members of the CROP EnergyWorking Group and the Working Group on Cli-mate Change, Climate Variability and Sea LevelRise.

On the global level Mr Chairman, the immedi-ate task at hand is the upcoming MauritiusInternational Meeting to undertake the 10- YearReview of the Barbados Programme of Actionfor the Sustainable Development of Small Is-lands Development States or SIDS, includingthe very constituents we jointly serve. As youknow, preparations are already underway and,with technical assistance from our CROP agen-cies, our members are engaging our partnersin a series of informal consultations to secure“actionable strategies” that will reinvigorate theimplementations of the Barbados Programmeof Action. This gathering of Leaders at the Mau-ritius meeting maybe the last opportunity forus to reaffirm to the international communityof our “special case for environment and devel-opment” as initially mooted in Agenda 21.SPREP will therefore continue to work togetherwith SOPAC and other sister CROP agencies inthis important process to better prepare ourPacific Leaders for the Mauritius meeting inJanuary next year.

To conclude and through you Mr Chairman, Iwould like to thank Council, the Director andthe Secretariat for the opportunity to addressthis honorable gathering. I can assure you thatyour Director and I will continue to build part-nerships and synergies that will best serve thecommon interests of our two organizations andthe people we serve.

Thank you

Attachment to SPREP Statement

SPREP’s comments on Agenda Item 6, Sub-agenda 6.1, Title 6.1.6 - Report on SOPAC’sactivities concerning climate change, sea levelrise and climate variability. Also apply toAgenda Item 8, Title 8.2 – Issues arising in theCommunity Lifelines Programme

On the Pacific Islands Renewable Energy Project(PIREP), SPREP reported that this is a projectof hers and is a continuation of an almost tenyears of collaborations among UNDP, the GEFand SPREP on building the capacities of PICsto deal with the challenges of climate change.SPREP admitted that while the project has a

82

renewable energy element, the emphasis has,is and will continue to be on the bigger pictureof climate change and how SPREP can assistPICs to meet their reporting requirements tothe Conference of the Parties and the interna-tional negotiations within the framework of theUNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol.

SPREP informed the meeting that the PIREPhas been designed and is currently being im-plemented in full consultations with the CROPEWG, including SOPAC, and at the nationallevel this is done through a Country Team con-sultative approach. SPREP updated the meet-ing on recent developments regarding thePIREP:

1. In the July 2004 meeting of the CROP inVanuatu, the CROP EWG through a paperon its revised ToR advised CROP that en-ergy is a cross-sectoral subject which cutsacross water, health, environment, tel-ecommunication, education, etc, and there-fore it is to be expected that there are manyplayers and donors interacting in energy-related activities.

2. In a CROP EWG paper to the July 2004CROP meeting justifying the continuanceof the CROP EWG, CROP was reminded ofthe only decision of the Forum Leaders onenergy sector coordination in 1981, i.e, thatthere be a coordinating agency and thatthe other regional agencies continue to dotheir respective energy sector-related ac-tivities.

3. In a July 2004 multipartite review meetingof the PIREP which was attended bySOPAC, Greenpeace, PICs, UNDP and GEF,the meeting approved that the PIREP beextended in order to allow SPREP tosmoothly continue with its execution of thesecond phase of the project which will becalled the Pacific Islands Greenhouse GasAbatement through Renewable EnergyProject (PIGGAREP).

4. The recent SPREP meeting in French Poly-nesia approved that SPREP continue todevelop and execute the second phase ofthe PIREP and to implement the project incollaboration with SOPAC and the CROPEWG including civil society organizationslike Greenpeace, WWF and the Pacific Con-cerns Resources Centre.

UNIVERSITY OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC

Honourable Chairperson, Director of SOPAC,Ms. Cristelle Pratt, Distinguished SOPAC Na-tional Government Representatives, Distin-guished representatives from other Govern-ments, Representatives from Fellow CROPAgencies, and from other Regional and Inter-national Organisations, ParticipatingGeoscientists, Ladies and gentlemen ...

The University continues to work in close col-laboration with the South Pacific AppliedGeoscience Commission (SOPAC), and thisworking relationship has been welcomed byboth Organisations. The Acting Vice-Chancel-lor, Professor Rajesh Chandra, University sen-ior management, and the USP Heads of Sec-tions, who directly interact with SOPAC, wishto record their appreciation for this long-stand-ing co-operation, and wish this 33rd.. AnnualSession of Council in Fiji, fruitful deliberations.The University wishes to thank most sincerelythe Government of Papua New Guinea for or-ganising this 33rd Session, and the Governmentof the Fiji Islands for generously agreeing thatthe venue be in this country.

The University wishes to emphasise that itplaces cooperation among CROP Agencies as ahigh priority on its agenda. USP regards asmost important the joint-approach in address-ing issues that seriously affect our region; some-times sharing is difficult to achieve, but theUniversity will spare no efforts in endeavour-ing to do so. This is clearly expressed in theUniversity’s Research Plan, and in the FutureDirections Consultative Report.

In the area of undergraduate and postgradu-ate geoscience studies, the University offers theRegion several programmes of university study.Bachelor of Science programmes in Earth Sci-ence, Marine Science, and Environmental Sci-ence show a pleasing level of enrolments. TheBachelor of Arts in Marine Affairs also includesan Earth Science component. Four years ago,new postgraduate diploma programmes in En-vironmental Science and in EnvironmentalStudies were inaugurated; each of these pro-grammes include major earth science compo-nents; a postgraduate diploma in Marine Sci-ence is also a popular programme servicedthrough the Marine Studies Programme, the

83

School of Social and Economic Development,and the School of Pure & Applied Sciences.

The University is very pleased indeed to see agrowing number of its own graduates from Fijiand the region entering the ranks of SOPACstaff, and wishes to express its appreciation toSOPAC for providing these opportunities. Manyof these young SOPAC staff personnel havechosen to continue their own postgraduatestudies at the USP.

This year, 2004, SOPAC again supported teach-ing and other services at USP: the third yearApplied Geology course in the Earth ScienceBSc (Staff of the Water Resources Unit), andthe Ocean Resources Management courses inthe School of Social and Economic DevelopmentSchool. The University is grateful to the SOPACDirector and Deputy Director for offering theservices of Commission staff to assist withteaching.

The University is currently undertaking dis-cussions on the possible restructuring of boththe faculty/School groupings and the academicprogrammes the faculties support; the USPCouncil’s committee for the University’s futuredirections is also proposing a new direction forUSP from now until the year 2020.

With respect to the Earth Science and MarineGeology Certificate Programme, the Universitywill continue to confer the award for as long asSOPAC should require this. The Certificatestudies continues this year with the third yearof the current cycle, and all look forward to anew set of graduates emerging from the nextUSP graduation in April of 2005. The Univer-sity, as of course SOPAC, is indeed grateful toCFTC for the continued funding of the Train-ing Coordinator’s position.

The University’s Marine Studies Programme isinvolved with SOPAC in several major initia-tives, and this collaboration will continue:

• Involvement in the CROP Marine SectorWorking Group with SOPAC as one themajor players. The Marine Studies Pro-gramme has been involved with the devel-opment of the Oceans Policy for the PacificIslands; and the University seeks tostrengthen its participation and represen-tation on all CROP Working Groups, includ-ing the (newest) Group on Sustainable De-velopment.

• SOPAC is represented on the USP MarineStudies Advisory Group;

• Marine Studies Programme and SOPACcollaborated in the last SOPAC boundariesmeeting conducted in Nadi 2002, and looksforward to further collaborative discussionsand activities.

• Marine Studies Programme (MSP) is en-deavouring to develop closer collaborationwith SOPAC, with special attention to re-search in Kiribati; and indeed in discus-sions with the SOPAC Director last month,the possibility was raised of establishing aMOU (along the same lines as being devel-oped with SPC).

• MSP is currently developing a BSc Envi-ronmental Science stream in “coastal man-agement”, and looks forward to SOPAC in-put and collaboration in an area signifi-cantly addressed by SOPAC since its in-ception.

The Pacific Centre for the Environment andSustainable Development (PACE-SD), estab-lished in 2001 as a new University initiativecontinues collaboration and inter-change withSOPAC in Climate Change and Variability, andDisaster Management. The following will be ofspecial interest to SOPAC member countries:

• A 16-week postgraduate-level programme,on Climate Change, Vulnerability and Ad-aptation Assessment, was held last year atthe University. This face-to-face, full-timeprogramme afforded the completing stu-dent two postgraduate courses which maybe used for a postgraduate diploma. Twelve(12) students from 10 of the regional coun-tries were enrolled; SOPAC has assistedwith the coastal profiling part of the train-ing, and the USP is sincerely appreciativeof this contribution.

• The GEF-funded AIACC Project: USP hasnegotiated with SOPAC’s Vulnerability as-sessment team for closer interaction.

• USP has worked closely with SOPAC’s EVIProject, during the development of SOPAC’sstrategy document for sustainable devel-opment.

• The Director of SOPAC is a member of thePACE-SD Advisory Board.

The University has been strongly representedalongside SOPAC in the CROP Energy WorkingGroup (EWG) and

84

• Has been heavily involved in the formula-tion of the Regional Energy Plan and Policy(PIEPP). USP continues to emphasise a fo-cus on education, training and R & D. Astrong interest exists in establishing a Cen-tre of Excellence in Energy, and the Uni-versity is to discuss this with donors un-der the Type 11 initiatives;;

• SOPAC-DANIDA funded project on capac-ity-building for wind energy is now underway; the PG course is currently being of-fered with an enrolment of 4. The wind tur-bine is to be located in the MRD Compound,Suva, near the SOPAC Secretariate. AUNESCAP Pilot training activity was organ-ised in November last year, and the activ-ity was a collaborative one with SOPAC.

• The Department of Physics has appointeda Senior Lecturer in Renewable Energy,which will add to the regional strength inexpertise; a growing interest in postgradu-ate studies in the energy area is evident,and there is scope for further scholarshipsfor regional studies in renewable energy;

• Two Memoranda of Understanding (MOU)have been signed between SOPAC and theUniversity: Collaboration in the technicalareas of water quality, and Preparation withthe Second High Level Adaptation Consul-tation.

Staff of the USP Department of Geography con-tinue to be involved in research and publica-tions activity closely related to SOPAC’s appliedresearch and consultancy:

Dr James Terry and Professor Patrick Nunncontinue to research in the hydrological re-sponses of tropical Pacific island rivers to largestorm events, at landscape responses in theregion to climate change (Terry), and island tec-tonics, sea-level changes, and the significanceof environmental details in Pacific Islandermyths (Nunn). All recent publications by theseauthors are available by consulting the USPwebsite.

The Department of Geography has strength-ened its GIS Unit with the addition of two moresenior staff, including Dr. Nick Rollings as theUnit’s new Director; a new senior lecturer inGIS and Remote Sensing has also been ap-

pointed. These latest moves by the Universityand the Department demonstrate the USP’srecognition of the increasing role that geospatialscience is playing in the Pacific region. USP hasalso agreed to the development of a Geomaticsstudy programme which will complement theexisting Land Use Planning and GIS studies.Another area of current investigation is the useof geomatics and GIS in multihazard mapping- another possible field of collaboration withSOPAC. The Department looks forward to sig-nificant collaboration with SOPAC in the areasof capacity building in the spatial sciences toimprove informed decision-making in the re-gion; discussions between the GIS staff and theITC SOPAC staff are currently in progress.

The University Library acknowledges the receiptof SOPAC publications for the Library’s PacificCollection, which supports research and con-sultancy in the areas of SOPAC focus. TheUniversity wishes to remind SOPAC that spe-cial arrangements are in place for SOPAC pro-fessional staff and SOPAC consultants to haveaccess to the Library’s Pacific Collection. Thispolicy extends the facility of USP Library ac-cess to all staff of CROP Agencies

USP Solutions, the commercial unit managingmany of the University’s consultancies, is aboutto complete a contract for an AUSAID-fundedresearch project, “The Economic Impact ofNatural Disasters on Development in the Pa-cific”. The research team, lead by Associateprofessor Biman Prasad, will develop economicanalysis tools for assessing the impact of dis-asters in the Pacific region, and evaluate theeconomics of Disaster Risk Management; USPSolutions is collaborating with SOPAC to im-plement this project.

On a final note, the Acting Vice-Chancellor ofthe University of the South Pacific wishes tothank most sincerely the SOPAC GoverningCouncil for the invitation to once again be rep-resented at this, and past council meeting. TheUniversity continues to note, and highlycommends, the excellent contribution the Com-mission is making to geoscience research andsustainable development in the Region, andwishes the SOPAC Director, Ms Cristelle Pratt,and all SOPAC staff and consultants, all thevery best of success in its future work.

85

PART III: STATEMENTS FROM SUPPORTING GOVERNMENTS ANDINTERNATIONAL AGENCIES

ARGO INTERNATIONAL PROJECT

The International Argo Project makes globalobservations of ocean temperature, salinity, andcirculation using an array of autonomous pro-filing floats, presently numbering 1400 instru-ments in all of the world’s oceans. For the firsttime, the global oceans are being continuouslymonitored for a wide range of applications in-cluding improved climate understanding, as-sessment, and prediction. SOPAC and its mem-ber nations have played a key role in the devel-opment of Argo, since its inception five yearsago, by facilitating and encouraging floatdeployments in the vast ocean region undertheir stewardship. The tropical Pacific Oceanplays a central role in inter-annual and decadalclimate phenomena such as El Nino/SouthernOscillation and Pacific Decadal Variability. Argoacknowledges the importance of its partnershipwith SOPAC, and will continue to work collabo-ratively in the coming years toward implement-ing applications of ocean observations for thebenefit of all people in the region.

Dean RoemmichScripps Institution of OceanographyChairman International Argo Steering Team

INTERGOVERNMENTALOCEANOGRAPHIC COMMISSION (ofUNESCO)

Good Morning everyone,

I would like to start by wishing Ms CristellePratt my sincerest best wishes for a successfulterm as Director of SOPAC. Some of us remem-ber Cristelle when she was just a little girl, andnow she is Director of SOPAC. What an enor-mous change in such a short period of time.

We cannot begin the meeting without acknowl-edging the contributions made by Mr. AlfSimpson to SOPAC. Alf is a legend in his owntime as a leader of SOPAC for 12 years. He isresponsible for giving the South Pacific a voicein UNESCO’s Intergovernmental OceanographicCommission and for building the bridge to Pa-cific Island GOOS.

Cristelle has already picked up this torch bysecuring the services of Dr. Sarah Grimes towork at SOPAC as PI-GOOS Coordinator.Cristelle actually had this responsibility whenserving as SOPAC’s Oceans Program Manager.

I hope you have a chance to introduce yourselfto Sarah during this meeting.

With Sarah now at SOPAC we expect to seemany more projects and activities which willsupport Pacific Island nations.

I am pleased that the Govt of Australia and theGovt of Western Australia have continued theirsupport to the IOC for PI-GOOS, including thefunds to support Sarah, and the support fromthe National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin-istration in the United States for this purpose.

The IOC is also represented at this meeting byDR. Mike Fortes. Mike is the new Director ofIOC’s WESTPAC Office in Bangkok, which hashad a long association with this region. Mikewill surely strengthen this relationship.

Finally my best wishes for a successful meet-ing and to Cristelle especially for the challengesthat lie ahead. IOC will do its utmost to sup-port SOPAC and the interests of its members.

TAIWAN/ROC

Mr Chairman, Honourable Delegates, Observ-ers, the Director and Staff of SOPAC, Distin-guished Guests:

The Government of Taiwan/ROC wishes to con-gratulate SOPAC, Papua New Guinea and theFiji Government for organising the 33rd annualsession of the South Pacific Applied GeoscienceCommission (SOPAC). I especially wish to con-gratulate Director Pratt of SOPAC for her devo-tion for this important meeting, the first sinceshe assumed her duty as the Director of SOPAC.

This annual meeting does not only provide agood opportunity for learning the needed sci-entific technology to improve our way of life,but avails the Pacific Island countries and ob-servers, including the Government of Taiwan/ROC, the opportunity to enhance mutual co-operation and understanding among the coun-tries and peoples of the region. Our commongoal is to minimize natural disasters, exploremore resources and eliminate poverty. My Gov-ernment is very honoured to be a part of thisbeautiful team.

Besides bilateral assistance to individual Fo-rum Island Countries, the Government of Tai-wan/ROC has contributed over 11 million US

86

dollars since 1993, to regional organisationsincluding SOPAC, under the umbrella of thePacific Islands Forum Secretariat, for the de-velopment of the region in areas such as agri-culture, fisheries, food processing, health,youth, women’s development, culture, marineindustry and various other Programmes. Thisis in addition to the annual funding ofUS$500,000 for the Taiwan/ROC-PIF Scholar-ship Scheme, launched in the year 1999, whichnow amounts to a total funding of US$3.0 mil-lion. So far, 88 awardees from 14 Forum Is-land countries have benefited from this schol-arship scheme.

My Government is proud to have substantiallyassisted SOPAC’s projects over the many yearsand we are very proud of its achievements. Thishas contributed significantly to the developmentand betterment of our Pacific region.

On behalf of my Government of Taiwan/ROCwe take this opportunity to wish this 33rd An-nual Session of SOPAC every success in itsdeliberations and my Government will continueto work closely with SOPAC, to promote scien-tific development and collaboration among thecountries and peoples of the Pacific Island re-gion.

Thank you.

UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENTPROGRAMME

The Chairperson and distinguished delegates,the United Nations Development Programme(UNDP) is pleased to address SOPAC’s 33rd An-nual Session.

UNDP and SOPAC share common goals, as bothorganizations are working in similar focal ar-eas, and as agencies of larger bodies such asthe UN and CROP respectively, which are work-ing closely to support the countries in the re-gion achieve the Millennium Development Goals(MDGs). The MDGs provide countries with cleartargets and indicators for achievement in keysocial and environment areas of developmentand demonstrate the interrelationships that areessential between and within sectors if equita-ble and sustainable development is to beachieved.

I would like to take this opportunity to sharebackground information about UNDP and il-lustrate how SOPAC and UNDP can and do thework together.

UNDP is represented in the Pacific by three of-fices. There are multi-country offices in Apia

and Suva and an office for Papua New Guineabased in Port Moresby. Across the region thereare also a number of other UN agencies whichwork together with the UNDP offices throughthe United Nations Country Teams, with theUNDP Resident Representatives in Apia, Suvaand Port Moresby being the Resident Coordi-nator of these UN Country Teams. UNDP is nota donor but has funding allocations for eachcountry as well as a number of regional projectsdesigned to support country and regional ini-tiatives and provide leverage for additional ex-ternal support.

UNDP works in 5 thematic areas: Poverty; HIV/AIDS; Democratic Governance; Energy andEnvironment; and Crisis Prevention and Re-covery, and incorporates cross-cutting issuessuch as Gender, and Information and Commu-nication Technologies (ICT). These thematicareas are closely related to SOPAC’s work inthe areas of water, transportation, energy, risk,governance and poverty, and provide muchscope for collaboration.

The achievement of the MDGs is seen as a criti-cal step to accomplish objectives of each ofUNDP’s five thematic areas. Thus, UNDP ispleased to note SOPAC’s work programme linksits work directly to the achievement of theMDGs by Pacific Island Countries (PICs) andthat this meeting’s agenda gives specific atten-tion to this important issue. The strong em-phasis on community also highlights the im-portance of ensuring full community involve-ment in development decisions and that im-provement in living standards for all peoplemust be grounded in community and based onits needs and aspirations.

UNDP is working with SOPAC through its Com-munity Lifelines Programme on the Pacific Is-land Energy Policies and Strategic Action Plan-ning (PIEPSAP) Project. The PIEPSAP is a newcooperation between the PICs, SOPAC, UNDP,and the government of Denmark and adds sub-stantially to the support already provided byDenmark to the Pacific Island Countries to-wards the implementation of the Barbados Pro-gramme of Action (BPOA). It is, at the sametime, a contribution to the European Union’s(EU) Energy Initiative and to the Pacific IslandEnergy for Sustainable Development-initiative,both launched at the World Summit for Sus-tainable Development (WSSD) in Johannes-burg, South Africa.

UNDP is also working closely with SOPAC’sCommunity Lifelines Programme and the Coun-cil of Regional Organizations in the Pacific’s(CROP) Energy Working Group (EWG) on the

87

Pacific Islands Energy Policy and Plan (PIEPP),which is soon to undergo a review. UNDP iscurrently liasing with SOPAC on the Sustain-able Integrated Water Resource Managementin the PICs project and looking at collaboratingon issues relating to the utilization of coconutoil for power generation.

UNDP’s Suva office assists ten countries in thePacific region through the implementation ofnationally executed projects supplemented andtechnically backstopped by regional projects.UNDP’s role as one of the Global EnvironmentFacility’s (GEF) implementing agencies is a cen-tral one, and involves management of numer-ous environmental projects. UNDP supports itsmember countries in integrating environmen-tal and developmental goals into national de-velopment plans and processes to protect theenvironment as well as reduce poverty.

Projects fall under GEF’s general focal areasand operational focal areas, and under threemain international conventions: the UnitedNations (UN) Convention of Biodiversity(UNCBD); the UN Framework Convention onClimate Change (UNFCCC); and the UN Con-vention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).

UNDP Suva is currently assisting up to tenPacific countries with existing projects such asNational Biodiversity Strategy Action Plans(NBSAPs); as well as relatively new projectssuch as National Adaptation Plans of Action(NAPA); Second National Communication (SNC)to the UNFCCC; and the National Capacity Self-Assessments (NCSA).

UNDP works with the South Pacific Regional

Environment Programme (SPREP) and ForumFisheries Agency (FFA) on regional projects.SPREP is managing the coastal component ofthe International waters Programme (IWP), theInvasive Species Management Project, and theSustainable Land Management Project, whileFFA is managing the oceanic component of thenIWP.

UNDP is working with the GEF’s Small GrantsProgramme (SGP) to develop country pro-grammes for fourteen Pacific Island Countries.Six country programmes are planned to belaunched this year with all fourteen to be inthe scheme in the next 2-3 years. The SGP is amore suitable funding facility for the PICs withits flexible nature and will enable NGOs andCommunity Service Organizations (CSOs) toobtain funding directly.

UNDP is working towards a more coordinatedapproach in its support of sustainable devel-opment processes through the creation of aRegional Centre to be based in Suva. The Re-gional Centre will encompass thematic areassuch as governance, poverty, and conflict pre-vention and recovery. Information on the cen-tre will be disseminated in due course. UNDPforesees further cooperation with SOPACthrough the centre.

UNDP Suva looks forward to stronger ties withSOPAC on all new environment projects thatfall under SOPAC’s areas of comparative ad-vantage and congratulates SOPAC on itsachievements so far. Thank you.

UNDP, SuvaSeptember 14, 2004

88

PART IV: STATEMENTS FROM NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

JAPAN OIL, GAS & METALS NATIONALCORPORTATION (JOGMEC)

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

On behalf of Japan Oil, Gas and Metals Na-tional Corporation (JOGMEC), I would like toexpress our sincere appreciation to the Secre-tariat of SOPAC and SOPAC member countries.We congratulate Ms Cristelle Pratt on her ap-pointment as Director of SOPAC.

Firstly, this is just to inform you that JapanOil, Gas and Metals National Corporation(JOGMEC) was established in February 2004as the result of a merger between MMAJ andJapan Oil National Corporation, to ensure thestable supply of energies and nonferrous met-als.

At the request of SOPAC, the Japan Interna-tional Cooperation Agency (JICA) and JOGMEC,formerly MMAJ, have been conducting surveysof deep ocean mineral resources in the EEZs ofSOPAC member countries since 1985.

The survey programme is composed of twostages:

The first stage of this joint project was con-cluded in March 2000, having seen explora-tion in the EEZs of Cook Islands, FederatedStates of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, MarshallIslands, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, SolomonIslands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. It wassuccessful in discovering valuable deep-oceanmineral deposits in several areas of the oceanfloor of the Pacific and also in identifying prom-ising sites for further investigation.

The second stage covers surveys to be carriedout over a six-year period, commencing in Aprilof 2000. The surveys are carried out using theresearch vessel Hakurei-Maru No.2, focusing ondetailed ore prospecting in the promising ar-eas found through the first stage and an envi-ronmental baseline survey for future marinemining activities. The EEZ of the Cook Islands,Fiji and the Marshall Islands have been inves-tigated so far in phase I of the second stage,which concluded in March 2003. The secondphase, with a three year duration, is on-goingand the 2003 survey of the first year of phaseII was conducted in the EEZ of the Kiribati andNiue. This is the first time that the survey cruiseusing R/V Hakurei-Maru No.2 was conductedin Niue waters through the programme and thesurvey cruise revealed manganese nodules inabundance in Niue waters. Coastal state rep-

resentatives from Kiribati and Niue participatedin the cruise as on-board trainees. This yearthe research cruise will be carried out in theEEZ of Fiji from December 17 to January 112005. Next year, the final year of the pro-gramme, the research cruise will be conductedin the EEZ of the Federated States of Micro-nesia

Besides the Deep-sea Mineral Resources JointProject, JICA has been despatching experts tothe SOPAC Technical Secretariat in Fiji since1987. They have been involved in offshore min-erals programmes, construction of databases,the related data management, cruise co-ordi-nation and various works in the field of off-shore programmes. Some JOGMEC staff havebeen working at the SOPAC Secretariat as JICAexperts, and I believe their work contributesgreatly to the steady development of the SouthPacific Countries.

JOGMEC hopes for further potential areas ofcooperation with SOPAC countries in variousfields.

Thank you.

KOREA OCEAN RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE (KORDI)

Distinguished delegates, Director and Secre-tariat Staffs of SOPAC, and Ladies and Gentle-men, I am very pleased to represent the KoreaOcean Research and Development Institute(KORDI) at the 33rd Annual Session of SOPAC.First of all, on behalf of KORDI, I extend greet-ings and congratulations on this occasion.

Since KORDI initiated its Marine Scientific Re-search (MSR) program in the South Pacific in1997, KORDI’s interests in this region has beengradually increased to various scientific areas.KORDI has been conducting several surveyprograms for seabed minerals such as cobalt-rich manganese crusts around the rims of oldCretaceous and Jurassic seamounts and hy-drothermal massive sulfides in back arc basinareas.

In conducting these activities, we have beenmaintaining bilateral collaboration with coastalstates and managed to establish mutual ben-efits from the results of surveys. I, on behalf ofKORDI, would like to borrow this occasion toexpress our sincere appreciation to SOPACmember countries for accepting KORDI’s MSR

89

requests in their Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) areas. KORDI supported and participatedSOPAC organized regional workshop held inPort Moresby in 2001, which handles sensitiveissues concerning procedures of marine scien-tific application. We appreciated and welcomedSOPAC’s role in issuing and settling contraryviews among survey bodies and coastal states.

This year, KORDI will have a research cruisein the EEZ of the Kingdom of Tonga to under-stand the submarine hydrothermal systems inthe Lau Basin, using the KORDI’s R/V Onnuri.This cruise will be continued for 18 days fromDecember 12 to 29. We have a plan to gatherbathymetric data and sub-bottom profiles, col-lect bedrock, hydrothermal sulfide, sediment,and seawater samples, take bottom photo-graphs, and to monitor the physicochemical

features of water masses at various depths. Arepresentative of the Kingdom of Tonga willparticipate in the cruise.

KORDI founded the Korea-South Pacific Oceanresearch Center (KSORC) in Chuuk State of theFederated States of Micronesia (FSM) in 2000,for the effective implementation of researchactivities in the region of the South Pacific. Al-though current activities of the Center are lim-ited to FSM, we have no doubt that Center’srole will expand its research activities to vari-ous regions in the SOPAC member countriesin the future.

We wish all of us will have a very successfuland fruitful 33rd Session.

Thank you, Vinaka.

90

APPENDIX 5

STAR CHAIR’S REPORT TO COUNCIL 2004

Chair of SOPAC, Excellencies, DistinguishedNational representatives and Delegation mem-bers, representatives of Institutions and Organi-sations, Ladies and Gentlemen.

I. Introduction

Thank you for this opportunity to formally re-port on STAR’s activities. But before I do so,may I take the opportunity on behalf of STARto extend our congratulations and best wishesto Cristelle as the new director of SOPAC. I amsure that our working relationship will be asproductive as that with her predecessor, AlfSimpson.

As people here for the first time may not befamiliar with STAR, I will briefly outline its role.

STAR is SOPAC’s Science, Technology and Re-sources Network and it acts as an interfacebetween the SOPAC Secretariat and its mem-ber nations and the international scientific com-munity. It does this in several ways. Every fewyears, an international scientific workshop ormeeting is either convened by STAR, or heldunder its auspices, on a broad theme relevantto the SOPAC region. STAR members also cor-respond and tender advice during the interven-ing periods.

Each year, a meeting at which scientific pa-pers are presented and discussed, and thematicWorking Groups meet, is held prior to this An-nual Session of the SOPAC Governing Council.This year, the 21st meeting of STAR was heldon September 18th and 19th at this hotel. AsSTAR is celebrating its 21st birthday, I wouldhere like to acknowledge Dr Kazuhiro Kitazawawho is present at this meeting and who wasinstrumental in setting up STAR originally. Thatthis unique symbiosis of scientists, managersand policymakers still thrives is a tribute tothe foresight of Kazu and the others who wereinvolved at the start.

II. STAR Presentations

As the Chair of SOPAC outlined this morning,the themes of this year’s STAR meeting were:

• Mineral policy, plate tectonics and offshoremining,

• Hazard assessment and risk management,and

• Water, sanitation and human settlement.

These themes were well developed and, as iscustomary with STAR, there were a range ofother papers on topics relevant to the region.During the meeting, 54 scientific papers andtwo longer general talks were presented orallyand 26 others by the posters displaying re-search results you see displayed at the back ofthis room. Abstracts of these are published inSOPAC Miscellaneous Report 576. As is alwaysthe case for STAR meetings, the informationpresented covered a broad range and partici-pants included representatives from disciplinesother than earth science. I recommend the vol-ume of abstracts as a guide to the range ofmaterial covered and as a source of much use-ful information.

Let me briefly outline the scope of the presen-tations for you, to indicate the variety. Duringthe Geology & Geophysics session, papers cov-ered aspects of the geology of tectonic plateboundaries and of other onshore and offshorestructural features. Oceans & Coastal paperslooked at data collection and application fromseveral viewpoints, coastal and lagoonalchange, and policy issues. Hazards & RiskManagement presentations covered a widerange of topics, including case studies in Aus-tralia, New Zealand and Fiji, and the conclu-sions to be drawn from them. Three presenta-tions devoted to the effects of tropical cycloneHeta were of particular interest as last year’sSTAR/Annual Session meetings were held onthat island.

Tsunami papers partly inspired by the SouthPacific Tsunami Awareness Workshop in Julyfilled three sessions, and covered many aspectsof this hazard. Papers associated with commu-nity lifelines covered issues related to water,sanitation and capacity building, as well as dis-cussions on societal development in the Solo-mon Islands and cost-benefit analyses of blackpearl farming.

The final session looked at several renewable

91

energy options together with petroleum anddeep ocean mining.

On Sunday evening, the meeting featured twoguest lectures on more general issues relevantto the region. These were entitled “What ismeant by sustainable development” by AndrewMatthews of NIWA and “Oceans and their eco-nomic significance and opportunities for the Pa-cific” by Alex Malahoff of IGNS.

III. Working Groups

In addition to the scientific presentations, 5working groups also met. These working groupsoffer an important opportunity for STAR del-egates to bring to the attention of Council itemsof particular scientific and technical importanceto the region.

This year the Energy, Observations & Monitor-ing, Risks, Tsunami and Water, Sanitation &Hygiene working groups met. I will report brieflyon their main recommendations here but thefull reports with supporting arguments for theconclusions are appended and I recommendthese for your perusal.

The Energy Working Group made the followingrecommendations: Energy Working Group(EWG) noted that a number of the recommen-dations from 2003 still remain relevant andwhere necessary have been combined or up-dated and included in this report. The key is-sues were as follows:

The WG noted the need to encourage the trans-fer of information on renewable energy tech-nologies and projects that have been utilisedwithin the region. The EWG acknowledged andaccepted Papua New Guinea’s offer to workjointly with SOPAC to report on progress withgeothermal energy development in particularthe Lihir Geothermal Project which could beused as a model for other geothermal projectdevelopment.

The Working Group further:

• endorsed the proactive approach thatSOPAC has taken in respect to the ongo-ing resource assessment in wind, wave,ocean thermal, geothermal, bio-fuels andbiomass, and encouraging the publicationof this information;

• reinforced the urgent need to establish anarrangement between Power Utilities, thePacific Power Association (PPA) and SOPACso as to allow the open and unrestrictedsharing of power utility information anddata;

• reinforced its supported for the earlier pro-posal to convene a central workshop tobring technicians from PICs together toprovide training and support to PICs in GISand Remote Sensing and encourage a par-ticular emphasis for the utilities;

• noted the proposal for a Regional EnergyMeeting (REM2004 to be convened in De-cember in Madang, Papua New Guinea;

Finally, the EWG noted the encouraging in-creased interest in Energy within STAR and theupcoming events such as CSD14 and CSD15(2006/2007) which include energy and couldprovide a focus within future STAR Sessions.

The Observations & Monitoring Working Groupworking group met to discuss the Pacific Is-land GOOS coordinator’s work plan. The coor-dinator position was established recently atSOPAC through combined funding of the IOCPerth Office, Bureau of Meteorology Australiaand NOAA and Ms. Sarah Grimes was ap-pointed to that position.

The working group concluded that an impor-tant action for Ms. Grimes should be reconsti-tuting the PI-GOOS Steering Committee, estab-lishing national focal points for PI-GOOS coun-tries and National Coordinating Committees forPI-GOOS.

Key immediate tasks are to establish a network,a website for PI-GOOS, travel to countries toassess needs and identify applications, surveysof the user community, interactions with serv-ice providers overseas - with close collabora-tion with the IOC Perth Office.

A work plan will be drafted and reviewed bySOPAC and GOOS to ensure oversight and en-hance donor support.

Ms. Grimes will seek to improve interactionswith foreign research vessel activities, includ-ing advance knowledge of ship schedules,greater participation in research activities, re-ceipt of research results and improved com-munications with researchers through guestlectures and seminars.

The Risks Working Group defined several ob-jectives and recommendations to Council.

The first objective is a greater focus on howpartnerships actually build capacity betweenSOPAC members and the respective nationalorganisations

Recommendation; that Governing Council:

• initiate a medium-term study to determinehow regional action plans are translated

92

into increased capacity for national pro-grams, among both public and private sec-tor institutions; and

• review the appropriateness of risk manage-ment models and their implementationamong different communities and sectorgroups.

The second objective is collaboration in geo-logical, geochemical, meteorological andclimatological hazard monitoring, to achieveeffective minimum surveillance of SW Pacifichazards.

Recommendation; that Governing Council:

• note that, without the ability to detect haz-ards and evaluate trends, the risk man-agement process has no adequate basis;

• note that timely pre-and post-disaster datacollection is an effective means of estab-lishing the cost-benefits for long-term miti-gation planning;

• agree to create a framework for pre- andpost-disaster assessment, with open shar-ing of information and appropriate use ofregional capabilities in association with de-velopment of a Spatial Data Infrastructure(SDI); and

• agree to commission a feasibility study todetermine the prerequisite capabilities(infrastructural, organisational, financialand political) for minimum, effective haz-ard detection, alerts and warnings.

The Tsunami Working Group considered the rec-ommendations of the South Pacific TsunamiAwareness Workshop July 1 – 3, 2004 and sev-eral other meetings, as well as the presenta-tions of the STAR. They presented the follow-ing recommendations for Council endorsement:

1. Support for the South Pacific TsunamiAwareness Workshop’s proposed work pro-gramme for 2 years as agreed in July 2004and specifically to:

• Finalise the Terms of Reference and es-tablish a SOPAC Tsunami WorkingGroup, which is to produce a work sched-ule within two months;

• Coordinate the investigation and devel-opment of a Regional Tsunami Informa-tion and Warning System within theSOPAC region;

• Finalise the Terms of Reference for therecommended Feasibility Study;

• Seek resources to conduct the Feasibil-ity Study for the Regional Tsunami In-formation and Warning System.

2. Consider the inclusion of the South PacificTsunami Awareness Workshop’s proposedwork programme in the Draft Pacific Re-gional Position Paper for the 2nd World Con-ference on Disaster Reduction.

The members of the Water, Sanitation & Hy-giene Working Group (WASH WG) present thefollowing recommendations:

1. They recommend that the Community Life-lines Programme continues to build its Wa-ter Sector programme upon the RegionalAction Plan on Sustainable Water Manage-ment (Pacific RAP).

2. They recommend the CLP continues to hostthe Coordination Unit and facilitate the Pa-cific Partnership on Sustainable WaterManagement as a modality for the imple-mentation of the Pacific RAP.

3. The WASH WG recommends SOPAC Mem-ber Countries use the Pacific RAP to de-velop and implement National Water Ac-tion Plans for Sustainable Water Manage-ment.

4. The WASH WG recommends CLP assist inimproving the availability and access to in-formation on water and sanitation on na-tional and regional levels through the de-velopment of databases and GIS/GPS.

With reference to the six thematic areas of thePacific RAP the WASH WG specifically recom-mends CLP to provide contributions specificallyto the following programmes:

I. Water Resources Management,

II. Island Vulnerability,

III. Awareness,

IV. Technology,

V. Institutional Arrangements, and

VI. Financing.

IV. General Comments from Chair ofSTAR

At this point, I would appreciate the opportu-nity to convey some personal impressions ofthis STAR meeting. The first is that the clearlyapplied direction to much of the research thathas always been a particular feature of STARcontinues and is increasingly directed towardsthe provision of quality technical advice to mem-ber governments. As just two examples of prac-tical studies, we heard details of the processesof deep ocean mining and of the use of copraoil as a transport fuel. A second point that im-pressed me is that large volumes of quantita-tive data are coming available rapidly now from

93

a range of monitoring and remote sensing sys-tems, and incorporating up-to-the-minute in-formation into research and policy will be acontinuing challenge for us all. Finally, this yearabout half of the STAR presentations were fromscientists based within the SOPAC region anda goodly proportion of those dealt with PapuaNew Guinea, giving us a glimpse of the fasci-nating geology of that country which the Chairof SOPAC alluded to in his greeting to us thismorning. Combined with the other presenta-tions, we are seeing genuinely global researchbut with a strong Pacific base.

As usual, STAR is indebted to staff of the SOPACSecretariat for their cheerful and untiring ef-forts that make the meeting possible. The STAR

I. Energy Working Group

Working Group Members: Bernard Pawih (PNG)[Chair], Joe Buleka (PNG), Nathan Mosusu(PNG); Donn Tolia (Solomon Islands), IsaacLekelalu (Solomon Islands) Chris Ioan(Vanuatu), Ian Fry (Tuvalu), Taputoa Titimaea(Samoa – Water Utility), Andrews Matthews(NIWA-NZ), Paul Fairbairn (SOPAC), GerhardZieroth (SOPAC), Anare Matakiviti (SOPAC),Yogita Bhikabhai (SOPAC), Jan Cloin (SOPAC– apology).

Facilitator/Rapporteur: Donn Tolia (SolomonIslands), Paul Fairbairn (SOPAC). Edits pro-vided by Andrews Matthews (NIWA-NZ) and IanFry (Tuvalu).

Working Group Report & Recommendations:

The members of the Energy Working Group(EWG) agreed the following recommendationsshould be submitted to Governing Council forthe benefit of the Community Lifelines Pro-gramme (CLP) and individual Member Coun-tries. In making this report it should be notedthat a number of the recommendations from2003 still remain relevant and where neces-sary have been combined or updated and in-cluded in this report. The key issues were asfollows:

meetings are organised over a much shortertime frame, and with fewer staff, than any otherconferences with which I have been associated.That is only possible thanks to the efforts ofthe Secretariat who, of course, also have thismeeting to prepare. And finally, Mr Chairman,may I take this opportunity as Chair of STARspeaking on behalf of all the scientists to thankour hosts, the Government and people of PapuaNew Guinea. And personally I’d like to say thankyou for your support during the meeting.

That concludes my address. Thank you.

John CollenChair, Science Technology and Resources Network (STAR)

Fiji, 21 September 2004

ATTACHMENT TO STAR CHAIR’S REPORTMINUTES OF STAR WORKING GROUPS

i) Noted the progress in the region with thedevelopment of renewable energy technolo-gies and the need for PICs to continue toplan for the design, development, integra-tion and use of these alternate sources ofenergy.

ii) Noted the interest and need to encouragethe transfer of information on renewableenergy technologies and projects that havebeen utilised within the region. The EWGacknowledged and accepted Papua NewGuinea’s offer to work jointly with SOPACto report on progress with geothermal en-ergy development in particular the recentLihir Geothermal Project in PNG where thiscould be used as a model for othergeothermal project development.

iii) Noting the technical publications alreadyprepared and published by SOPAC andthose in final draft, requested that SOPACcontinue to update these as relevant tak-ing into account pilot projects such as theLihir Geothermal, and further take a leadrole in the identification and disseminationof information on new and developing tech-nologies including information where re-search is being carried out on relevant al-ternate energy sources and developmentthat are relevant for adoption within theregion.

iv) Endorsed the proactive approach that

94

SOPAC has taken in respect to the ongo-ing resource assessment in wind, wave,ocean thermal, geothermal, bio-fuels andbiomass, encouraged the publication of thisinformation including the monitoring andreporting on the use of other potential en-ergy sources and fuels such as ethanol.

v) Acknowledged the work of NIWA in resourceassessment (in wind, wave and tidal) andin particular highlighted recent work inmodelling complex terrain.

vi) Recommended that SOPAC continue tomonitor the progress with other potentialdeveloping energy technologies.

vii) Noted and supported the current exchangeof energy information through the PacificEnergy Newsletter (PEN) and the PacificPower Association (PPA) Magazine.

viii) Reinforced the urgent need to establish anarrangement between Power Utilities, thePacific Power Association (PPA) and SOPACso as to allow the open and unrestrictedsharing of power utility information anddata without condition or constraint.

ix) Reinforced its supported for the earlier pro-posal to convene a central workshop tobring technicians from PICs together toprovide training and support to PICs in GISand Remote Sensing and encourage a par-ticular emphasis for the utilities (power /water / telecom / PWD). Furthermore theEWG encourages SOPAC to seek fundingto support this initiative.

x) Noted the need to continue in parallel withidentifying alternate energy sources the im-plementation of demand and supply sidemanagement and sustainable energy de-velopments to reduce wastage and improveefficiency.

xi) Noted and thanked SOPAC for the updateon the current review of the Pacific IslandsEnergy Policy and Plan (PIEPP), the PacificIslands Energy Policy and Strategic ActionPlanning (PIEPSAP) Project, the GEF Re-gional Energy Efficiency Project (TransportSector), and the Pacific Islands RenewableEnergy Project (PIREP – Phase I) and pro-posed PIREP – Phase II.

xii) Noted the proposal for a Regional EnergyMeeting (REM2004 to be convened in De-cember in Madang, Papua New Guinea.

xiii) Concern was noted regarding the split inregional renewable energy activities be-tween CROP Organisations and urgedgreater collaboration between CROP Or-ganisations to ensure more effective, effi-

cient and coordinated delivery of regionalrenewable energy programmes.

xiv) The EWG noted the future proposedstrengthening of the regional energy pro-gramme at SOPAC to provide assistance tomember countries through the Pacific Is-lands Energy Policy and Strategic ActionPlanning (PIEPSAP) Project in policy andplanning matters.

xv) The proposal of SPREP to develop a set ofGuidelines for the development of CDMprojects was noted. The EWG highlightedthat as there were significant inter-linkagesbetween CDM and energy, noted that CDMwas also a component within the PIEPSAPmenu of options, and hoped that therewould be collaboration between SPREP andSOPAC in the development of the guide-lines and energy focused CDM projects.

xvi) Finally the EWG noted the encouragingincreased interest in the Energy withinSTAR and that the upcoming events, inparticular the CSD14 and CSD15 (2006/2007) which includes energy and couldprovide a focal area for future STAR Ses-sions.

II. Observations and MonitoringWorking Group

Chair: Bill Erb

The working group met to discuss the progressof Pacific Island GOOS and to suggest activi-ties to be undertaken by the new PI-GOOS Co-ordinator Ms. Sarah Grimes. The coordinatorposition was established recently through com-bined funding of the IOC Perth Office, Bureauof Meteorology Australia and NOAA. Ms. Grimeswill be located at SOPAC who will provide herlocal support.

In the past year PI-GOOS has made significantprogress with continued capacity building re-lated to activities in SEREAD, remote sensingand regional organizational development. Aworkshop was held in Brisbane on remote sens-ing, SOPAC hosted the first meeting of theGOOS Regional Alliances in Suva and SEREADcompleted the resource manuals for primaryand secondary schools and conducted threeworkshops in the region to train teachers.

The working group concluded that an impor-tant action for Ms. Grimes should be reconsti-tuting the PI-GOOS Steering Committee, estab-lishing national focal points for PI-GOOS coun-

95

tries and National Coordinating Committees forPI-GOOS. These organizational entities willguide and assist the future development of theprogram and are critical elements.

Key immediate tasks for Ms. Grimes are to es-tablish a network and improve communication.Steps to be taken include a website for PI-GOOSwith proper linkages. Travel to countries is re-quired to assess needs and to identify applica-tions and services that are available to the coun-tries. Assessment of needs will be enhanced bysurveys of the user community throughout theregion. Interactions with service providers over-seas will be necessary to achieve an under-standing of the applications available and tonegotiate with the service providers delivery ofthe services to the South Pacific. The IOC PerthOffice will work closely with Ms. Grimes toachieve this result and will provide continuedfunding support.

Reflecting the result of the PAAOP WorkshopMs. Grimes will also devote some time to im-proving interactions with foreign research ves-sel activities in the region. This should includeadvance knowledge of ship research schedules,greater participation by locals in research ac-tivities and research cruise results and infor-mation, and improved communications withresearchers through guest lectures and semi-nars while transiting through the region.

The PI-GOOS initiative is one requiring gov-ernmental cooperation, commitment and agreat deal of personal support, volunteerismand a community spirit. We are hoping thatthat the South Pacific will share this commit-ment for the benefit of all the people in its re-gion.

The key elements associated with PI-GOOS arePRODUCTS, COMMUNICATIONS, ORGANIZA-TION, OBSERVATIONS, COMMITMENT, PEO-PLE and FUNDING.

III. RISK Working Group

Present: Amo Mark (PNG) (Vice Chair), AncietBeauvais (IRD, New Caledonia), AndrewMatthews (NIWA, NZ), Bernard Pelletier (IRD,New Caledonia), David Heron (GNS, NZ), DougRamsay (NIWA, NZ), Emily McKenzie (SOPAC),Hugh Cowan (GNS, NZ) (Chair), Michael Bonte(SOPAC), Noud Leenders (SOPAC), PeterNewsome (Landcare, NZ), Roger Jones (SOPAC),Sandra Melzer (Uni. Bonn, Germany), TariqRahiman (Uni. Cant. NZ)

Apologies: Laura Kong (ITSU, Hawaii), Wally

Johnson (GA, Australia), Stan Goosby (PDC,Hawaii)

Introduction

“RISK” encompasses all of the environmental,technological, social and economic factors thataffect the well-being of SOPAC member com-munities.

This broad scope is reflected in the range ofaffiliations and discipline expertise offered bythe members of this ad-hoc working group.

The following objectives and recommendationsreflect awareness or perception of growing needsarising from work in progress among memberorganisations and States. We submit theseviews for consideration by the SOPAC Govern-ing Council.

Objectives and Recommendations

Objective: A greater focus on how partnershipsactually build capacity between SOPAC mem-bers and the respective national organisations.

Recommendation: That the Governing Council:

Initiate a medium-term study to determine howregional action plans are translated into in-creased capacity for national programs, amongboth public and private sector institutions1

Review the appropriateness of risk manage-ment models and their implementation amongdifferent communities and sector groups

Objective: Collaboration in geological,geochemical, meteorological and climatologicalhazard monitoring, to achieve effective mini-mum surveillance of SW Pacific hazards.

Recommendation: That the Governing Council:

Note, that without the ability to detect haz-ards and evaluate trends, the risk managementprocess has no adequate basis2

Note, that timely pre-and post-disaster datacollection is an effective means of establishingthe cost-benefits for long-term mitigation plan-ning

Agree, to create a framework for pre- and post-disaster assessment, with open sharing of in-

1 An example could be the regional action plan for sustain-able water use

2 This applies to all hazards. Illustrative examples includedetection of tsunami or volcanic ash plumes, resource de-pletion, water or soil contamination and coastal erosion

96

formation and appropriate use of regional ca-pabilities in association with development of aSpatial Data Infrastructure (SDI)

Agree, to commission a feasibility study to de-termine the prerequisite capabilities(infrastructural, organisational, financial andpolitical) for minimum, effective hazard detec-tion, alerts and warnings

IV. Tsunami Working Group

Members of Group: Lawrence Anton [Chair], AtuKaloumaira, Michael Bonte-Grapentin, NoudLeenders, Job Esau, Laura Kong, LorenKroenke, Wally Johnson, Dave Tappin, DougRamsay, Chalapan Kaluwin, Chip McCreery,Bernard Pelletier, Kazuhara Kitazawa, and KataDuaibe

Recommendation to Council: Upon consid-ering the recommendations of the South Pa-cific Tsunami Awareness Workshop July 1 – 3,2004, the presentations of the STAR sessionand the discussions of the STAR Tsunami Work-ing Group; and

Recognizing the long experiences of theUNESCO/IOC International CoordinationGroup for the Tsunami Warning System in thePacific (ITSU) and its efforts to promote thedevelopment of regional tsunami warning sys-tems in the Pacific for more effective tsunamimitigation; and

Noting the Draft Pacific Regional Position Pa-per for the 2nd World Conference on DisasterReduction;

We present the following recommendations forCouncil endorsement:

1. Support the South Pacific Tsunami Aware-ness Workshop’s proposed work programme for2 years as agreed in July 2004 and specificallyto:

• Finalise the Terms of Reference and estab-lish a SOPAC Tsunami Working Group,which is to produce a work schedule withintwo months;

• Coordinate the investigation and develop-ment of a Regional Tsunami Informationand Warning System within the SOPACregion;

• Finalise the Terms of Reference for the rec-ommended Feasibility Study;

Seek resources to conduct the Feasibility Studyfor the Regional Tsunami Information andWarning System.

2. Consider the inclusion of the South PacificTsunami Awareness Workshop’s proposedwork programme in the Draft Pacific Re-gional Position Paper for the 2nd World Con-ference on Disaster Reduction.

V. Water, Sanitation And HygieneWorking Group

Working Group Members: Tevita Fatai, (Tonga);Isaac Lekelalu, (Sol.Is); Andrew Matthews,(NIWA); Alex Malahoff, (GNS, NZ); Paula Wilisoni(Fiji); Andre Siohane (Niue); Ben Parakoti (CookIs); Tamara Tait, (GNS, NZ); Petero Lafaele(ASPA, Am. Samoa); Esmond Moses (PUC,Pohnpei); David Dengokl (BPW, Palau); AnthonyChargualaf (Guam Waterworks Authority);George Laman, (Yap Water Authority); LamekoTalia, (Met. Samoa); Malakai Finau, (MRD, Fiji);Amataga Penaia, (SWA, Samoa); MoefaauoTaputoa Titimaea, (SWA, Samoa); Amo Mark,(PNG Waterboard); Taboia Metutera, (PUB,Kiribati); Lucio Haller, (CPUC, Chuuk); EitaMetai, (PUB, Kiribati); Ian Fry, Env. Division,Tuvalu). Alena Lawedrau-Moroca, (SOPAC);Rhonda Bower, (SOPAC); Marc Overmars,(SOPAC); Sarabjeet Singh, (SOPAC); SarahDavies, (SOPAC); Stephen Booth, (SOPAC).

Facilitator/Rapporteur: Mike Dworksy (PWA)

Working Group Report & Recommendations:

The members of the Water, Sanitation & Hy-giene Working Group (WASH WG) agreed thefollowing recommendations should be submit-ted to Governing Council for the benefit of theCommunity Lifelines Programme (CLP) and in-dividual Member Countries:

The WASH WG recommends the CLP contin-ues to build its Water Sector programme uponthe Regional Action Plan on Sustainable WaterManagement (Pacific RAP).

The WASH WG recommends the CLP contin-ues to host the Coordination Unit and facili-tate the Pacific Partnership on SustainableWater Management as a modality for the im-plementation of the Pacific RAP.

The WASH WG recommends SOPAC MemberCountries to use the Pacific RAP to develop andimplement National Water Action Plans forSustainable Water Management.

The WASH WG recommends CLP to assist inimproving the availability and access to infor-mation on water and sanitation on national an

97

regional levels through the development ofdatabases and GIS/GPS.

With reference to the six thematic areas of thePacific RAP the WASH WG specifically recom-mends CLP to provide contributions specificallyto the following programmes and actions:

I. Water Resources Management – A hydrologysupport programme for National HydrologicalServices to augment the regional hydrologicaltraining programme.

II. Island Vulnerability – Improve access to cli-mate information and assistance in droughtmitigation and disaster preparedness for wa-ter managers.

III. Awareness – Improve communication and

coordination between all stakeholders in wa-ter, sanitation and hygiene

IV. Technology – A comprehensive regional wa-ter demand management and leak detectionprogramme to reduce unaccounted-for water.

V. Institutional Arrangements – Develop Nationalinstruments (including national visions, poli-cies, plans and legislation) for good water gov-ernance appropriate to each island country andadopt a Integrated Water Resources Manage-ment approach.

VI. Financing – Reduces costs through improvedoperational efficiencies using benchmarking,asset management, development of water-lossreduction programmes and improved workpractices.

98

APPENDIX 6

REVISED RULES OF PROCEDURES ON EXECUTIVE APPOINTMENTS

Preliminary

1. Article 7 section 3 of the Agreement Estab-lishing the South Pacific Applied GeoscienceCommission vests the power to make appoint-ments to the positions of Director and DeputyDirector in the Governing Council (hereinafterreferred to as the Council). However, Councilat its 33rd Session held September 2004, agreedthat henceforth the Director only would be ap-pointed by Council and the Deputy Director beappointed by the Director in close consultationwith a Council approved Appointments Sub-committee for the Deputy Director.

2. Only nationals of SOPAC member countriesshall be eligible for appointments as Director.

3. The position requirements for the Directorshall be approved by the Council.

4. The initial term of an appointment shall befor a period of three (3) years. Incumbents mayapply for and the Council may at its discretionapprove one three (3) year extension to the ini-tial term. Under no circumstances would anextension beyond six (6) years be considered.

Notification of vacancies to member coun-tries

5. The Director shall send notification of a va-cancy to National Representatives of membercountries as soon as practicable and at thesame time advertisements are to be placed.

6. In the event that an incumbent indicates anintention to vacate a position prior to the sched-uled termination date, the Director shall ad-vise the Chair and shall immediately notify thegovernments of member countries with a viewto initiating the regular recruitment proceduresas soon as possible.

Interim appointments should a Deputy Di-rector not be in Post

7. As an interim arrangement where for anyreason it is impossible or impracticable to ap-

point a Director in accordance with these pro-cedures before the incumbent leaves his/herpost and as a result there is an unfilled va-cancy, the Chair, in consultation with membergovernments, may appoint an interim Directoron such terms and conditions as may be ap-proved by the Council.

8. The interim Director may be selected fromthe Secretariat or, if there is no suitable candi-date in the Secretariat, from nominees of mem-ber countries.

9. Interim appointments stand until a perma-nent appointment is made. Interim appoint-ments confer on the holder no assumption ofpermanency. Holders of an interim appointmentshall not however be precluded from applyingfor permanent appointment in accordance withthe provisions of these procedures.

Advertisement

10. Vacancies will be advertised at least six (6)months prior to the Annual Session at whichthe appointment is to be made. Applicationsshould close three (3) months prior to the An-nual Session. Each country is responsible foradvertising the vacancy at national level.

11. Advertisements will be placed in public ga-zettes, appropriate national newspapers, appro-priate regional magazines or journals and otherpublications at the discretion of the Chair.

Applications

12. Applications should be addressed in confi-dence to the Chair and should contain a fullcurriculum vitae of the candidate and thenames and addresses of three professional ref-erees. The Chair, in his/her discretion, maydirect that applications be addressed to him/her care of the Secretariat. In such circum-stances the Secretariat will act at the directionof the Chair.

13. Applications should reach the Chair by theclosing date.

A. PROCEDURES FOR APPOINTMENT OF DIRECTOR(23rd September 2004)

99

14. Incumbents eligible for reappointment fora second 3-year term are required only to ex-press their interest in writing to the Chair bythe closing date.

Appointments Committee

15. An ad hoc Committee shall be appointedby the Council (hereinafter referred to as the“Appointments Committee”) to assist the Coun-cil in the initial selection process. This com-mittee to be determined at the Council meetingprior to an appointment being made. The roleof the Committee will be to screen applications,conduct interviews if necessary, and make arecommendation to Council.

16. The Appointments Committee to include:(i) the Chair(ii) Vice Chair(iii) not less than two (2) other mem-

bers

17. The initial function of the AppointmentsCommittee shall be to screen all applicationsreceived and to draw up a short-list of not morethan five candidates for consideration by Coun-cil. This task to be completed within one monthof closure of applications.

18. In carrying out this function the Appoint-ments Committee shall:

(i) prepare a summary of all applicants anddetermine their eligibility

(ii) consider each eligible application indi-vidually having regard to the criteria es-tablished by the Council, this to be sum-marised in a spreadsheet, identifyingscoring criteria and weighting, andthereby identifying the short-listed can-didates in preferred order;

(iii) call for referees reports for the short-listedcandidates

(iv) prepare a report for circulation to mem-ber countries on each of the short-listedcandidates, this report to include lettersof application, CVs, and referees reportsreceived, together with results sheets pro-vided by each member of the Committee.

19. Immediately upon completion of the report,the Chair shall forward a copy of the same toeach member country. Member countries maysubmit to the Chair comments on the short-list or the report of the Appointments Commit-tee.

Interview

20. The Chair after reviewing the report of theAppointments Committee and following consul-tation with Council, will call for interviews.Should this be necessary, the AppointmentsCommittee shall form the interview panel andinterviews completed at least three weeks priorto Council meeting.

21. The interview panel shall prepare an im-mediate interview report, including scoring cri-teria presented in a spreadsheet, on each in-terviewed candidate which shall be forwardedto member governments.

Final Selection Process

22. The final selection of the Director shall bemade by the Council.

23. In considering its decision Council shallhave available the reports and recommenda-tions of the work of the Appointments Com-mittee including the shortlisting and interviewprocesses. In making an appointment the Coun-cil will fully consider the work of the Appoint-ments Committee, but shall not be constrainedin any way by the recommendations of the Ap-pointments Committee.

24. In deciding upon appointments the Coun-cil shall make every effort to reach a decisionby consensus consistent with Article 6.10 inthe Constitution. Should consensus not bereached, Council must decide either to adhereto the procedure in the Agreement Establish-ing the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Com-mission, or to an alternate acceptable process.

25. The Chair to negotiate with the successfulcandidate on behalf of Council. As such, a draftletter of contract agreed to by Council, andsigned on Council’s behalf by the Chair is to bepresented to the successful candidate as soonas practical. Should the successful candidatenot accept the position, then the position isoffered to the runnerup. Council notes that ithas secured a new Director only after a con-tract is signed by both parties.

Amendments

26. The Council reserves the right to amend orwaive these procedures in exceptional circum-stances. This provision should not be invokedwhilst the rules are being applied during a par-ticular appointment process.

100

Preliminary

1. Article 7 section 3 of the Agreement Estab-lishing the South Pacific Applied GeoscienceCommission vests the power to make appoint-ments to the positions of Director and DeputyDirector in the Governing Council (hereinafterreferred to as the Council). However, Councilat its 33rd Session held September 2004, agreedthat henceforth the Director only would be ap-pointed by Council and the Deputy Director beappointed by the Director in close consultationwith a Council approved subcommittee (here-after referred to as “Appointments Subcommit-tee for Deputy Director”).

Appointment Process

2. The position requirements for the DeputyDirector shall be approved by the Council, priorto advertising, and at that time the Appoint-ments Subcommittee for the Deputy Directorbe determined.

3. The Appointments Subcommittee shall com-prise at least four members of Council and theDirector

4. The appointments process for the DeputyDirector shall conform to that approved byCouncil for Secretariat Professional Staff andthe role of the Appointments Subcommittee is

to oversee the process including acting as ascreening and interview panel.

5. The initial term of an appointment shall befor a period of three (3) years. Incumbents mayapply for one three (3) year extension to theinitial term. Under no circumstances would anextension beyond six (6) years be considered.

Interim appointments

6. As an interim arrangement where for anyreason it is impossible or impracticable to ap-point a Deputy Director in accordance withthese procedures before the incumbent leaveshis/her post and as a result there is an un-filled vacancy, the Director, in consultation withCouncil, may appoint an interim Deputy Di-rector.

7. The interim Deputy Director may be selectedfrom the Secretariat or, if there is no suitablecandidate in the Secretariat, from nominees ofmember countries.

8. Interim appointments stand until a perma-nent appointment is made) Interim appoint-ments confer on the holder no assumption ofpermanency. Holders of an interim appointmentshall not however be precluded from applyingfor permanent appointment in accordance withthe provisions of these procedures.

B. PROCEDURES FOR APPOINTMENT OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR(23rd September 2004)

101

APPENDIX 7

LIST OF CONFERENCE ROOM DOCUMENTS

AS 33/1/Info 1 Information Circular

AS 33/1/Info 2 Programme for Official Opening (Circulated at Registration)

AS 33/3.1 Rev. 2 Provisional Agenda

AS 33/3.1/Info 1 Draft Working Schedule

AS 33/3.1/Info 2 Working Procedures

AS 33/3.1/Info 3 List of Conference Room Documents

AS 33/3.1/Info 4 Provisional List of Participants (To be circulated at Registration)

AS 33/4.1 Designation of SOPAC National Representatives

AS 33/6.1.1 2003 Annual Report Summary

AS 33/6.1.2 Summary Report of 2004 Donor Support

AS 33/6.1.3 Review of Country Profiles

AS 33/6.1.4 SOPAC Work Programme and the MDGs

AS 33/6.1.5 International Meeting on SIDS, Mauritius January 2005

AS 33/6.1.6 Report on SOPAC Activities Concerning Climate Change, Sea Level Rise,Climate Variability and Extreme Weather Events

AS 33/6.2 CROP Summary Report

AS 33/6.3 STAR Chair Report

AS 33/6.4 SOPAC/EU Project Report

AS 33/7.1 Report on the Ocean & Islands Programme for 2004

AS 33/7.2 Issues Arising in the Ocean & Islands Programme

AS 33/8.1 Report on the Community Lifelines Programme for 2004

AS 33/8.2 Issues Arising in the Community Lifelines Programme

AS 33/9.1 Report on the Community Risk Programme for 2004

AS 33/9.2 Issues Arising in the Community Risk Programme

AS 33/10 Programme Review Monitoring & EvaluationAS 33/10 Supp [Nominated Members of the] Programme Review Monitoring & Evaluation

Groups

AS 33/11.2* SOPAC 2005-2009 Corporate Plan and Programme Strategies

102

AS 33/11.3* Leader’s Pacific PlanAS 33/11.3 Supp* [Information Paper – An Assessment of Regional Mechanisms and Proc-

esses in the Pacific]

AS 33/12.1.1* 2003 Audited Financial Statements, Auditors Report and ManagementReport

AS 33/12.1.2* Report on 2003 Regular Budget Variance and Virement of Funds

AS 33/12.1.3* Report on Assets & Inventory written off for the year ended 31 December2003

AS 33/12.2.1* Financial Accounts for the 6-month period to June 2004

AS 33/12.2.2* Membership Contributions

AS 33/13.1* Rules of Procedure for Executive AppointmentsAS 33/13.1 Supp* [Revisions to] Rules of Procedure for Executive Appointments

AS 33/13.2* Deputy Director Position

AS 33/13.3* SOPAC Staff Remuneration-CROP Remuneration Review Report

AS 33/13.4* Reappointment of Contract Staff since 32nd Annual Session

AS 33/13.5* Secretariat Integrated Corporate Risk Management Plan

AS 33/13.6* Review of ICT, Library and Publications Guidelines

AS 33/13.7* Review of Financial Regulations

AS 33/14.1* Reserve Fund Ceiling

AS 33/14.2* Appointment of Auditor

AS 33/14.3* Draft 2005 Work Plan and Budget

* Restricted distribution to Council on only

103

APPENDIX 8

ACRONYMS(CUMULATIVE LISTING)

AAPG – American Association of Petroleum Geologists (Tulsa, USA)

ACDP – Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler

ACIAR – Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

ACP – African, Caribbean and the Pacific countries of the Lome Convention

ACTEW – Australian Capital Territory Electricity and Water Corporation

ADB – Asian Development Bank

ADCP – acoustic doppler current profiler

ADITC – Australian Drilling Industry Training Committee

AFAC – Australasian Fire Authorities Council

AGC – Atlantic Geoscience Center (Canada)

AGSO – Australian Geological Survey Organisation

AIACC – Assessments of Impacts and Adaptations to Climate Change

AIDAB – Australian International Development Assistance Bureau

AMSAT – Australia Marine Science & Technology Limited

ANU – Australian National University

ANZECC – Australia and New Zealand Conservation Council

AOSIS – Alliance of Small Island States

AOPC – Atmospheric Observing Panel for Climate

AOSIS – Alliance of Small Island States

APAN – Asia Pacific Area Network

APEC – Asia-Pacific Economic Commission

APPA – American Public Power Association

APPEA – Australian Petroleum Production Exploration Association

APPL – Application of Petroleum Prospecting Licenses

ARGO – Array for Real-time Geostrophic Oceanography

ARGOS – A satellite location and data collection system (CNES/NOAA)

AS – Annual Session (SOPAC)

ASEAN – Association of Southeast Asian Nations

ASLR – accerelated sea-level rise

ASPA – American Samoa Power Authority

ATP – authority to prospect

AUD – Australian Dollar

AusAID – Australian Agency for International Development

AUSLIG – Australian Surveying and Land Information Group

AVI – Australian Volunteers International

AVHRR – Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer

104

AWA – Australia Water Association

AWWA – American Water Works Association

BAC – Climate Alert Bulletin

BGR – Bundesanstalt fur Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe (Germany)

BGS – British Geological Survey

BIO – Bedford Institute of Oceanography (Canada)

BOM – Bureau of Meteorology (Australia)

BPoA – Barbados Plan of Action

BRGM – Bureau de Recherche Géologiques

BSc – Bachelor of Science

CalCOFI – California Cooperative Fishery Investigation

CalTech – California Institute of Technology

CAR – Communities At Risk

CBD – Convention of Biological Diversity

CCCC – Climate Change Carrying Capacity

CCCCC – Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre

CBO – Community-Based Organisations

CCAMLR – Commission for the Conservation of Antartic Marine Living Resources

CCOP – Committee for Coordination of Joint Prospecting for Mineral Resources in Asian Off-shore Areas (ESCAP)

CCOP/SOPAC – Committee for Coordination of Joint Prospecting for Mineral Resources in South Pa-cific Offshore Areas (now SOPAC)

CDM – Clean Development Mechanisms

CD-ROM – Compact Disc Read Only Memory

CDPI – Community Development and Participation Initiatives

CDR – Centre for Disaster Research (of UPNG)

CEA – Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique (Atomic Energy Commission), France

CEHI – Caribbean Environmental Health Institute

CELT – Centre for the Enhancement of Learning and Teaching

CEO – Centre for Earth Observation

CEO – Chief Executive Officer

CEOS – Committee on Earth Observation Satellites

CERMP – Cyclone Emergency and Risk Management Project (Tonga)

CESMG – see ESMG

CFTC – Commonwealth Fund for Technical Co-operation

C-GOOS – Coastal-Global Ocean Observing System

CGPS (cGPS) – Continuous Global Positioning System

CHARM – Comprehensive Hazards and Risk Management

CIDA – Canadian International Development Agency

CISNet – Coastal Index Site Network

CLIPS – Climate Information and Prediction Services

CLIVAR – Climate Variability and Predictability

105

CLP – Community Lifelines Programme (SOPAC)

C-MAN – Coastal Marine Automated Network

CMM – Commission for Marine Meteorology

CNES – Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (National Center for Space Studies)

CNMI – Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

CNRS – Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (National Center for Scientific Research),France

COE – Corps of Engineers (properly USACE) (USA)

COLA – cost of living adjustment

COM – College of Micronesia (of FSM)

COMBAS – a joint Japanese-French project to study active marginal basins in the SouthwestPacific (followed the STARMER programme)

COMSEC – Commonwealth Secretariat (UK)

COOP – Coastal Ocean Processes Programme

CORA – Canadian Ocean Resource Associates Inc.

CP1 – Core Project 1, the Global Description of the World Ocean

CPCEMR – Circum-Pacific Council for Energy and Mineral Resources

CPPS – Permanent Commission for the South Pacific

CPWC – Collaborative Programme on Water and Climate

CRGA – Committee of Representatives of Governments and Administrations (of South PacificCommunity)

CROP – Council of Regional Organisations of the Pacific (formerly SPOCC)

CROP ICT WG – CROP Information and Communication Technologies Working Group

CRP – Community Risk Programme (SOPAC)

CSA – Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (USA)

CSC – Commonwealth Science Council

CSD – Commission of Sustainable Development (of United Nations)

CSI – Coastal Regions and Small Islands (of UNESCO)

CSIRO – Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (Australia)

CSO – Civil Society Organisation

CSP – Conservation Society of Pohnpei

CSPOD – Canadian South Pacific Ocean Development Programme

CT – Composting Toilet

CTD – Conductivity/Temperature/Depth Device

DANIDA – Danish International Development Agency

DBCP – Data Buoy Cooperation Panel

DDSMS – Department of Development Support and Management Services (of UNDP)

DFID – Department for International Development (UK)

DGMWR – Department of Geology, Mines and Water Resources (Vanuatu)

DGPS – Differential Global Positioning System

DISMAC – Disaster Management Centre

DMA – Defence Mapping Agency (US)

106

DMU – Disaster Management Unit (SOPAC Secretariat)

DO – Dissolved Oxygen

DoM – Department of Mining (PNG)

DOALOS – (UN) Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea

DORD – Deep Ocean Resources Development Co. Ltd, Japan

DOS – Disk Operating System

DOWA – Deep Ocean Water Applications

DSDP – Deep Sea Drilling Project

DSM – Demand Side Management

DSTO – Defense and Science and Technology Organisation (Australia)

DTM – Digital Terrain Modelling

DWC – Dialogue on Water and Climate

EC – European Community (now EU)

ECOSOC – Economic and Social Council (UN)

ECU – European Currency Unit

EDF – European Development Fund

EEZ – Exclusive Economic Zone

EFH – Essential Fish Habitat

EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment

EMA – Emergency Management Australia

EMP – Ecosystem Monitoring Programme

EMT – Executive Management Team (SOPAC)

ENSO – El Niño Southern Oscillation

ENVISAT – Environmental Satellite

EPC – Electric Power Corporation (Samoa)

EPC – thermal graphic recorder used in mapping (probably after company founder: EdwardP. Curly)

EPCS – Electronic Particle Counting System

EPM – Environmental Programme for the Mediterranean

ER – Internal SOPAC Secretariat abbreviation for EU-SOPAC Project reports

ESCAP – Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UN)

ESMG – Earth Science and Marine Geology (SOPAC certificate course)

ESSI – Earth Search Science Incorporation

EST – Environmentally Sound Technologies

EU – European Union

EUEI – European Union Energy Initiative [for Poverty Eradication for Sustainable Develop-ment]

EUMETSAT – European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites

EVI – Environmental Vulnerability Index

EWG – Energy Working Group (CROP)

FADS – Fish Aggregation Devices (FADS)

107

FAO – Food Agriculture Organisation (UN)

FAU – Finance and Administration Unit (of SOPAC Work Programme)

FAUST – French-Australia Seismic Transect

FCCC – Framework Convention on Climate Change

FEA – Fiji Electricity Authority

FEPC – Federation of Electric Power Companies (Japan)

FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency (US)

FEMM – Forum Economic Ministers Meeting

FFA – Forum Fisheries Agency

FFEM – Fonds Française pour l’Environnement Mondial (French Funds for Global Environ-ment)

FEMS – Fiji Forest Export Marketing System

FICs – Forum Island Countries

FIELD – Foundation for International Environmental Law and Development

FINNIDA – Finnish Department of International Development Cooperation

FINTEL – Fiji’s International Telecommunications Provider

FIT – Fiji Institute of Technology

FJD – Fijian Dollar

FLIS – Fiji Land Information System

FMS – Fiji Meteorological Service

FNPF – Fiji National Provident Fund

FNTC – Fiji National Training Council (now TPAF)

FOAM – Forecast Ocean Atmosphere Model

FOC – Forum Officials Committee

FRI – Fisheries Research Institute

FSM – Federated States of Micronesia

FSP – Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific

FTIB – Fiji Trade and Investment Board

GCOS – Global Climate Observing System

GCRMN – Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network

GDIN – Global Disaster Information Network

GDP – Gross Domestic Product

GEBCO – General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans (IOC-IHO)

GEF – Global Environmental Facility (World Bank-UNEP-UNDP)

GEOHAB – Global Ecology of Harmful Algal Blooms

GERIS – Geological and Earth Resources Information System (PNG)

GEST – Group for the Export of Services and Technology (of New Caledonia)

GII – Geophysical Institute of Israel

GIPCO – GOOS Integrated Panel for the Coastal Ocean

GIPME – Global Investigation of Pollution in the Marine Environment

GIS – Geographic Information Systems

108

GIS/RS – Geographic Information Systems and Remote Sensing

GIWA – Global and International Waters Assessment

GLI – Global Imager

GLOBEC – Global Ocean Ecosystems Dynamics Programme

GLOSS – Global Sea-Level Observing System

GNP Gross National Product

GODAE – Global Ocean Data Assimilation Experiment

GOES – Geosynchronous Operational Environmental Satellite

GOOS – Global Ocean Observing System

EuroGOOS – European GOOS

I-GOOS – Intergovernmental GOOS

NEARGOOS – North East Asian Region GOOS

MedGOOS – Mediterranean GOOS

PI-GOOS – Pacific Island GOOS

GOSSP – Global Observing Systems Space Panel

GPA – Global Plan for Action

GPF – General Purpose Fund

GPS – Global Positioning System

GRID – Global Resource Information Database (UNEP)

GSC – Geological Survey of Canada

GSJ – Geological Survey of Japan

GTOS – Global Terrestrial Observing System

GTQ – Gas to Queensland Project (Papua New Guinea)

GTS – Global Telecommunications System (of WMO)

GTSPP – Global Temperature-Salinity Pilot Programme

GTZ – German Technical Cooperation

GWP – Global Water Partnership

HAB – Harmful Algal Blooms

HAU – Hazards Assessment Unit (SOPAC Secretariat)

HDI – Human Development Index

HIG – Hawaii Institute of Geophysics (of UH)

HLC – High-Level Consultation

HOTO – Health Of The Oceans (IOC)

HOTS – Hawaii Ocean Time Series Station

HPLC – High Performance Liquid Chromatography

HRD – Human Resources Development Unit (of SOPAC Work Programme)

HURL – Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory (of UH)

HYCOS – Hydrological Cycle Observing System

IAEA – International Atomic Energy Agency

IAMSLIC – International Association of Aquatic and Marine Science Libraries and InformationCenters

109

IAS – Institute of Applied Science (USP)

IAVCEI – International Association of Volcanism and Chemistry of the Earth’s Interior

IBTS – International Bottom Trawl Survey

ICCEPT – Imperial College Centre for Energy Policy and Technology

ICES – International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

ICM – Integrated Catchment Management

ICOD – International Centre for Ocean Development (Canada)

ICOGS – International Consortium of Geological Surveys

ICRI – International Coral Reef Initiative

ICSU – International Council of Scientific Unions

ICT – Information and Communication Technologies

ICU – [Pacific] Islands Climate Update (NZAID)

ICZM – Integrated Coastal Zone Management

IDNDR – International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction

IEDS – Integrated Exploration and Development Services Limited (Australia)

IETC – International Environmental Technology Centre

IFREMER – Institut Francaise de Recherche pour l’Explotation de la Mer (Formerly CNEXO)

IGBP – International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

IGES – Institute for Golbal Environmental Strategies

IGNS – Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences (of New Zealand)

IGODS – Interactive Graphical Ocean Database System

I-GOOS – Intergovernmental Committee for GOOS

IGOSS – Integrated Global Ocean Services Systems

IHO – International Hydrographic Organisation (of IOC/UNESCO) French OceanographicResearch Institute

IHP – International Hydrological Programme (of UNESCO)

IIEC – International Institute for Energy Conservation

IISEE – International Institute of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering

IKONOS – High Resolution Satellite Imagery

IMA – International Market Allowance

IMO – International Maritime Organisation

INET – Internet Conference organised by ISOC

IOC – International Oceanographic Commission (of UNESCO)

IODE – International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange

IOS – Initial Observing System of GOOS

IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IRC – Internal Revenue Commission (PNG)

IRD – Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (ex ORSTOM)

IRETA – Institute for Research Extension and Training in Agriculture (USP)

IRI – International Research Institute for Climate Prediction

IRIS – Incorporated Research Institution for Seismology

110

ISA – International Seabed Authority

ISC – Interim Sub-Committee (of SOPAC Governing Council to deal with future role anddirection of SOPAC)

ISDR – International Strategy for Disaster Reduction

ISM – Island Systems Management

ISOC – Internet Society

ISP – Internet Service Provider

ISPRS – International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing

I-SSEP – Interiors-Science Steering and Evaluation Panel

IT – Information Technology

IT-Pacnet – Annual meeting of the CROP ICT Working Group

ITIC – International Tsunami Information Centre

ITSU – International Coordination Group for the Tsunami Warning System in the Pacific

ITTO – International Tropical Timber Organisation

ITU – Information Technology Unit (SOPAC Secretariat)

IUG – International Union of Geographers

IWCAM – Integrated Watershed and Coastal Area Management

IWP – International Water Programme

IWRM – Integrated Water Resources Management

IYO – International Year of the Ocean (also YOTO)

JAFOOS – Joint Australian Facility for Ocean Observing Systems

JAIF – Japan Atomic Industrial Forum

JAMSTEC – Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (formerly Japan Marine Sci-ence and Technology Centre)

JCOMM – Joint WMO/IOC Technical Commission for Oceanography and Marine Meteorology

JGOFS – Joint Global Ocean Flux Study

JIBC – Japan Bank of International Cooperation

JICA – Japan International Co-operation Agency

JNOC – Japan National Oil Corporation

JOGMEC – Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (formerly MMAJ)

JPfA – Joint Caribbean-Pacific Programme for Action on Water and Climate

JPOI Johannesburg Plan of Implementation

JREC – Johannesburg Renewable Energy Coalition

JWP – Just World Partners (UK)

KEEP – Kiribati Environmental Education Project

kgoe – kilogram of oil equivalents

KIGAM – Korea Institute of Geology, Mining and Minerals

KMPC – Korea Mining Promotion Corporation

KOICA – Korea International Cooperation Agency

KORDI – Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute

ktoe – kiloton of oil equivalents

111

LADS – Laser Airborne Depth Sounder

LAN/WAN – Local Area Network/Wide Area Network

LDC Least Developed Countries

LDG – Less Developed Countries (UN)

LEO – Long-term Ecosystem Observatories

LITHP – JOIDES Lithosphere Panel

LME – Large Marine Ecosystems

LMER – Land-Margin Ecosystem Research Programme

LMR – Living Marine Resources

LOA – Letter of Agreement

LOICZ – Land-Ocean Interactions in the Coastal Zone

LOIS – Large Ocean Island States

LTER – Long-Term Ecological Research

LUCC – Land Use and Cover Change Programme

MBSM – Multi-Beam Swath Mapper

MCDEM – Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (New Zealand)

MDG – Millennium Development Goals

MERIS – Medium Resolution Imaging Spectrometer

MEXT – (Japanese) Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

MIMRA – Marshall Islands Marine Resources Authority

MITI – Ministry of International Trade and Industry (Japan)

MLML – Moss Landing Marine Laboratory

MLSNR – Ministry of Lands, Survey and Natural Resources (Tonga)

MMAJ – Metal Mining Agency of Japan (now JOGMEC)

MMTC – Marine Minerals Technology Center (University of Hawaii)

MNRD – Ministry of Natural Resources Development

MODIS – Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer

MOMAF – Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (Korea)

MONBUSHO – Ministry of Education and Science (Japan)

MOU – Memorandum of Understanding

MRD – Mineral Resources Department (of Fiji Islands)

MRU – Mineral Resources Unit (SOPAC Secretariat)

MSR – Marine Scientific Research

NAML – North American Marine Laboratories Network

NAO – North Atlantic Oscillation

NASA – National Aeronautics and Space Administration (US)

NDMO – National Disaster Management Office (various countries)

NEDO – New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organisation (of Japan)

NEMS – National Environmental Management Strategy (various countries by SPREP)

NGCC – National GOOS Coordination Committee

NGDC – National Geophysical Data Center (US)

112

NGO – Non-Governmental Organisations

NIO – National Institute of Oceanography (India)

NIRE – National Institute for Resources and Environment (of Japan)

NIWA – National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research (New Zealand)

NLTB – Native Land Trust Board (Fiji)

NMFS – National Marine Fisheries Service

NOAA – National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (US)

NODC – National Oceanographic Data Centre

NOPACCS – Northwest Pacific Carbon Cycle Study

NORAD – Norwegian Agency for International Development

NSF – National Science Foundation (US)

NTCA – National Tidal Centre Australia

NURP – National Undersea Research Programme (US)

NZAID – New Zealand Agency for International Development (formerly known as NZODA)

NZIGNS – New Zealand Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences

NZODA – New Zealand Overseas Development Assistance (now NZAID)

NZWWA – New Zealand Water and Wasterwater Association

OBS – ocean bottom seismometer

OCEANOR – Oceanographic Company of Norway AS

OCT – Overseas Countries and Territories (which are associated with the European Union)

ODA – Overseas Development Agency

ODI – Overseas Development Institute

ODP – Ocean Drilling Programme

OECD – Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

OECS – Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States

OEDC – Ocean Engineering Development Company (Japan)

OFDA – Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance

OHP – Operational Hydrology Programme (of WMO)

OISCA – Organisation for Industrial, Spiritual and Cultural Advancement

OJP – Ontong Java Plateau

OOPC – Ocean Observations Panel for Climate

OOSDP – Ocean Observing System Development Panel

OPCs – Optical Plankton Counters

ORAP – Ocean Research Advisory Panel

ORI – Ocean Research Institute (University of Tokyo)

ORMP – Ocean Resources Management Programme (of USP)

ORSTOM – Institut Francaise de Recherche Scientifique pour le Développement en Coopération(formerly Office de la Recherche Scientifique et Technique Outre-Mer) (French Insti-tute of Scientific Research for Cooperative Development), see IRD

OTEC – Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion

PACE-SD – Pacific Centre for the Environment and Sustainable Development

113

PACER – Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations

PacESD – Pacific Centre for Environment and Sustainable Development

PACPOL – Pacific Ocean Pollution Prevention (Programme)

PALM – Pacific Island Leaders Meeting (acronym used to refer to Japan-PIFS Summit Meet-ings, begun in 1997, 2nd Summit in 2000, and 3rd in May 2003)

PAMBU – Pacific Manuscripts Bureau

PAOOP Potential Applications of Ocean Observations for the Pacific Islands Region

PAR – Photosynthetic Active Radiation

PAYE – Pay as you Earn

PCGIAP – Permanent Committee on GIS Infrastructure for Asia and the Pacific

PCM – Participatory Watershed Management

PcSs Pacific Coastal States

PDC – Pacific Disaster Center

PDF – Portable Document Format

PDL – Petroleum Development Licenses

PDO – Pacific Decadal Oscillation

PDWBC – Pacific Deep Western Boundary Current

PEAC – Pacific ENSO Application Center

PEACESAT – Pan-Pacific Education and Communications Experiment by Satellite

PEAMIS – Pacific Environment Assessment and Management Information System

PECC – Pacific Economic Cooperation Council

PEG – Pacific Energy and Gender Network

PEN – Pacific Energy News (SOPAC)

PESA – Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia

PET ’98 – Pacific Exploration Technology (conference of 1998, Nadi, Fiji Islands)

PFTAC – Pacific Financial Technical Assistance Centre

PIAS (DG) – Pacific Institute for the Advanced Studies in Development and Governance

PIBA – Pacific Islands Broadcasting Association

PIC – Pacific Island Country (s)

PICCAP – Pacific Islands Climate Change Assistance Programme

PICES – North Pacific Marine Science Organisation

PICHTR – Pacific International Center for High Technology Research

PICISOC – Pacific Islands Chapter of the Internet Society

PICTAR – Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement

PICTs – Pacific Islands Countries and Territories

PIDP – Pacific Islands Development Program

PIEPP – Pacific Islands Energy Policy and Plan

PIEPSAP Pacific Islands Energy Policies and Strategic Action Plan

PIESD Pacific Islands Energy for Sustainable Development

PIFS – Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat

PIG – Pacific Island Gold

114

PIGS – Pacific Islands Geological Society

PIGGAREP – Pacific Islands Greenhouse Gas Abatement through Renewable Renewable EnergyProject (PIREP Phase II)

PIIPP – Pacific Islands Information and Communications Technologies Policy and StrategicPlan

PIMD – Pacific Institute of Management and Development

PIMM – Pacific Islands Management Model

PIMRIS – Pacific Islands Marine Resources Information System

PIRATA – Pilot Research Array in the Tropical Atlantic

PIREIS – Pacific Island Resource and Environment Information Service

PIREN – Pacific Island Renewable Energy Network

PIREP – Pacific Islands Renewable Energy Project (SPREP)

PIRMBIS – Pacific Islands Regional Maritime Boundaries Information System

PIROF – Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Forum

PIROF-ISA – Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Framework – Integrated Strategic Action

PIROIS – Pacific Islands Region Ocean Information System

PIROP – Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Policy

PLU – Publications and Library Unit (of SOPAC Work Programme)

PMEG – Programme Monitoring and Evaluation Group(s) (SOPAC)

PMEL – Pacific Marine Environment Laboratory (of NOAA)

PNG – Papua New Guinea

POC – Physical Oceanography Committee

POGO – Partnership for Observation for the Global Ocean

PPA – Pacific Power Association

PPB – private post bag

PPL – Petroleum Prospecting Licenses

PNG – Papua New Guinea

PORTS – Physical Oceanographic Real-Time System

PRAP – Pacific Regional Action Plan on Sustainable Water Management

PRC – People’s Republic of China

PRDMM – Pacific Regional Disaster Management Meeting

PREA – Pacific Regional Energy Assessment

PREFACE – the Pacific Rural Renewable Energy France-Australia Common Endeavour Project

PREP – Pacific Regional Energy Programme

PRIP – Pacific Regional Indicative Programme

PSSA – Particularly Sensitive Sea Area

PPSEAWA – Pan-Pacific South-East Asia Women Association

PTWC – Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre

PUB – Public Utilities Board

PWA – Pacific Water Association

PWD – Public Works Department

115

PWP – Pacific Water Partnership

RAC – Regional Analysis Centers

RAMP – Rapid Assessment of Marine Pollution

RAMSI – Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands

RAO – Regional Authorising Office (EU)

RAP – Regional Action Plan

RB – Regular Budget

REEEP – Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership

REM – Regional Energy Meeting

REPP – Regional Energy Policy and Plan

RINEX – Receiver Independent Exchange Format

RMI – Republic of the Marshall Islands

ROC – Republic of China

ROV – remotely operated vehicles

RTFP – Regional Trade Facilitation Programme (Pacific)

RS – remote sensing

RSC – Regional Steering Committee (of UNESCO, IHP in the Asia-Pacific region)

SAP – Strategic Action Plan for International Waters

SAPHE – Sanitation, Public Health and Environmental Improvement (Project)

SAR – synthetic aperture radar

SBSTA – Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice

SCOR – Scientific Committee on Ocean Research

SDI – Sustainable Development Indicators

SDR – Special Drawing Rights

SDWG – Sustainable Development Working Group (CROP)

SEACAMP – Southeast Asian Centre for Atmospheric and Marine Prediction

SEAFRAME – Sea Level Fine Resolution Acoustic Measuring Equipment

SEREAD – Scientific Educational Resources and Experience Associated with the Deployment ofArgo profiling floats in the South Pacific Ocean

SeaWIFs – Sea-viewing Wide Field of View Sensor

SEI – Special Events Imager

SHMAK – Stream Health Monitoring and Assessment kit (New Zealand)

SIDS – Small Island Developing States

SIEA – Solomon Islands Electricity Authority

SIO – Scripps Institute of Oceanography (University of California, US)

SIS – Small Island States

SIWIN – Small Islands Water Information Network

SLH – Sea Level Height

SM – SPREP Meeting

SOA – State Oceanic Administration (China)

SOC – Southampton Oceanography Centre

116

SOEST – School of Ocean and Earth Science Technology (of UH)

SOI – Southern Oscillation Index

SOOP – Ship-of-Opportunity Programme

SOPAC – South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission

SPACHEE – South Pacific Action Committee for Human Ecology and Environment

SPAS – School of Pure and Applied Sciences (USP)

SPaRCE – Schools of the Pacific Rainfall Climate Experiment

SPBCP – South Pacific Biodiversity Conservation Programme

SPBEA – South Pacific Board of Educational Assessment

SPC – Secretariat of the Pacific Community

SPDRP – South Pacific Disaster Reduction Programme

SPILLCON – Asia Pacific marine environmental pollution prevention & response conference

SPM – Sustainable Project Management

SPREP – Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme

SPOCC – South Pacific Organisations Coordinating Committee (now CROP)

SPPO – South Pacific Programme Office (of UNDHA)

SPREP – South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme

SPSLCMP – South Pacific Sea Level and Climate Monitoring Project

SPT – Station Polynesienne de Teledetection (Papeete, Tahiti)

SPTO – South Pacific Tourism Organisation

SST – Sea Surface Temperature

STA – Science and Technology Agency (of Japan)

STAR – Science, Technology and Resources Network

START – (Global Change) System for Analysis Research and Training (IGBP)

SURE – Sustainable Use of Renewable Energy

SWA – Samoa Water Authority

SWPHC – South West Pacific Hydrographic Commission

SYSMIN – A special financing facility intended for ACP States whose mining sector plays a majorrole in their economy and is faced with known or foreseeable difficulties

TAF – The Asia Foundation

TAG – Technical Advisory Group

TAO-IP – Tropical Atmosphere Ocean Implementation Panel

TCDT – Tonga Community Development Trust (now called Tonga Trust)

TCSP – Tourism Council of the South Pacific

TCWUP – Tropical Cyclone Warning Upgrade Project

T-DEM – Time-Domain Electromagnetic

TEMA – IOC Training, Education and Mutual Assistance programme

TEPB – Tonga Electric Power Board

TESL – Teaching English as a Second Language

TNA – Training Needs Analysis

TNC – The Nature Conservancy (Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia)

117

TOGA – Tropical Ocean Global Atmosphere Research Programme

TOPEX – Typhoon Operational Experiment

ToR – Terms of Reference

TPAF – Training and Productivity Authority of Fiji (formerly FNTC)

TQM – total quality management

TRITON – Triangle Trans-Oceans Buoy Network

TTPI – Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

TWAS – Third World Academy of Sciences

TWB – Tonga Water Board

UFP – Universite Francaise du Pacifique

UH – University of Hawaii

UK – United Kingdom

UN – United Nations

UNCED – United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

UNCLCS – United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf

UNCLOS – United Nations on the Law of the Sea

UNCTAD – United Nations Conference on Trade and Development

UNDESA – United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs

UNDHA – United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs

UNDP – United Nations Development Programme

UNEP – United Nations Environment Programme

UNESCO – United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation

UNFA – United Nations Fisheries Agreement

UNFCCC COP – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Conference of the Parties)

UNICEF – United Nations Children’s Fund

UNIFEM – United Nations Development Fund for Women

UNISPACE – United National Conference on Outer Space

UNU – United Nations University

UoG – University of Guam

UPNG – University of Papua New Guinea

US United States

USACE – United States Army Corps of Engineers

USAID – United States Agency for International Development

USD – United States Dollar

USGS – United States Geological Survey

USP – University of the South Pacific

VISSR – Visible and Infrared Spin-Scan Radiometer

VMS – Vessel Monitoring System

VOS – Voluntary Observing Ship

VPA – Virtual Population Analysis

VSAT – Very Small Aperture Terminal

118

VUW – Victoria University of Wellington

WAGIS – Wide Area Geographic Information System

WASH – Water Sanitation Hygiene (WSSCC)

WASH WG – Water, Sanitation & Hygiene Working Group (STAR)

WCRP – World Climate Research Programme

WERI – Water and Environmental Research Institute of the Western Pacific (of University ofGuam)

WESTPAC – IOC Sub-Commission for the Western Pacific

WGNE – Working Group on Numerical Experimentation

WHO – World Health Organisation

WHOI – Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (US)

WHYCOS World Hydrological Cycle Observing System

WIOMAP – Western Indian Ocean Marine Applications Project

WMO – World Meteorological Organisation

WPSs – Work Programme Strategies (SOPAC)

WRU – Water Resources Unit (SOPAC Secretariat)

WSIS – World Summit on the Information Society

WSSCC – Water Supply & Sanitation Collaborative Council

WSSD – World Summit on Sustainable Development

WTO – World Trade Organisation

WWF – World Wide Fund for Nature

WWF-SPP – World Wide Fund for Nature – South Pacific Programme

3rdWWF – Third World Water Forum

WWG – Water Working Group (STAR)

WWII – World War 2

WWSSN – World Wide Seismic Network

XBTs – Expandable Bathy-Thermographs

YOTO – Year of the Ocean

YPR – Yield-Per-Recruit