Conclusion 1. FAO/OIE are invited to submit a detailed proposal to the EC relating to the global FMD laboratory services underpinning the global strategy, and particularly the activities to be conducted by Pirbright as the “Global Co-ordinating Reference Laboratory”).
Item 11 - Priority activities for inclusion in the 2013-16 four year EuFMD Action Plan Dr Herzog summarized the discussion of the Executive which had been held as a closed meeting on the 4th. This meeting had worked through a series of discussion points on the issues: -
EuFMD Constitution: are the articles IV and V on Commission functions still valid, do they reflect current priorities?; Should the focus remain on FMD or should control of other diseases be within the scope?; What type of services are needed/requested in relation to free and endemic Member States?; Which geographical or other networks of countries should be supported and/or led by EuFMD?; Should EuFMD support initiatives only if a Member State is leading the network?; Technical and research support: structure of the STC and research Committee, Open Sessions, is there the need for a competitive research fund?; Role and tasks of the STC, including technical review and foresight (strategic advice); Structure of the EuFMD; membership, seats, role of international organizations; Role of the EuFMD in the implementation or support for the Global Strategy; Administration: including improving the administrative autonomy of the EuFMD in managing its independent finances, and EuFMD-EMPRES (FAO) co-operation; Budget: membership contributions, EC trust Fund.
Regarding several of these issues, such as FMD focus and geographical involvements, the OIE had previously expressed its concerns and had asked for greater clarity. These were considered during the closed meeting. The outcome of these discussions could be summarised as follows: 1. The Constitution remains valid, with no major reasons to change the current Articles which allow flexibility to work in and with non-member countries where there is a reason of common interest to do so, such as emergency situations, strengthening FMD control in neighbouring countries, and joint international actions with countries sharing common interest (e.g. Australia in the example of the training programme); 2. The requests of special Member States, Turkey and Israel, that are at high risk from the neighbours, can be the basis for support by the EuFMD, in regional “network” such as the West Eurasia Roadmap and for Israel and its neighbours, with political leadership of EU or EuFMD Member States in the regions (e.g. Turkey and Cyprus); 3. The focus should remain on FMD, and there was no discussion on changing the constitution to allow opening to non-European countries which may have interest to support some of the common functions (e.g. FMD free countries interest in vaccine banks); 4. The services currently provided to Member States include both direct and indirect support for FMD risk management. Direct support includes training of MS staff; indirect support includes risk communication (neighbourhood threat monitoring and response, global FMD risk) and risk reduction (promoting FMD management in the south-east regional neighbourhood). In the past th
84 Session of the EuFMD Executive Committee meeting, Pirbright, UK, 4-5 October 2012
21
