source
stringclasses 1
value | document_id
stringlengths 11
11
| title
stringlengths 4
531
| short_title
stringlengths 0
109
| author
stringclasses 941
values | date
stringlengths 3
10
| type_of_document
stringclasses 5
values | identifier
stringlengths 0
1.19k
| link
stringlengths 54
54
| file
stringlengths 0
25
| folder
stringclasses 157
values | word_count
int64 0
373k
| character_count
int64 0
3.12M
| text
stringlengths 0
3.12M
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GATT Library | bf203jb4021 | Sub-Committee A. Draft agenda prepared by the Secretariat for the Third Meeting. : To be held 9 December 1947 at 4:00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 9, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 09/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2.C.4/A/3, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bf203jb4021 | bf203jb4021_90200003.xml | GATT_155 | 259 | 1,900 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED E/CONF.2.C.4/A/3
CONFERENCE ON DU CONFERENCE 9 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FOURTH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE A
DRAFT AGENDA PREPARED BY THE SECRETARIAT FOR THE THIRD MEETING
To be held 9 December 1947 at 4:00 p.m.
1. Continuation of the discussion of amendments listed in the agenda for the
second meeting of the sub-committee. (E/CONF.2/C.4/A/2).
(a) The report of Ad-hoc committee on the amendments relating to the
use of the words "decide" and decision" in Chapter V.
'b) Amendment proposed by the delegation of Argentina for the deletion
of the words "individually or through the Organization or in both ways"
IIn paragraph 1, Article 44 (E/CONF.2/C.4/1).
(c) Amendment proposed by the delegation of Mexico for the deletion of
article 48. (E/CONF.2/C.4/1.Add.5).
2. Article 44 Paragraph 3, Sub-Paragraph C
The amendment proposed by the delegation of Afghanistan for the insertion
of the following words (E/CONF.2/C.4/Add.7): "including the discriminatory
establishment of exclusive agencies, detrimental to a member's economy."
3. Article 45, Paragraph 1.
The amendment proposed. by the delegation of Mexico for the addition of the
following text at the end of this paragraph (E/CONF.2/C.4/1 Add.5): "The
members invited to make part in a consultation shall be chosen in equal
number from each group proposed for this purpose by the parties affected
by the dispute."
4. Article 45, Paragraph 4
The following proviso proposed by the delegation of Mexico
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.5):
"After hearing the opinion of the members referred to in the final
part of paragraph 1 of this Article." |
GATT Library | sk193mf6486 | Sub-Committee A. Draft agenda prepared by the Secretariat for the Twentieth Meeting. : To bo Held, 1 January 1948, at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 31, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 31/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/18, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/sk193mf6486 | sk193mf6486_90200018.xml | GATT_155 | 322 | 2,158 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/18
ON DU 31 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FOURTH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE A
DRAFT AGENDA PREPARED BY THE SECRETARIAT FOR THE TWENTIETH MEETING
To bo Held, 1 January 1948, at 4.00 p.m.
1. The following paragraph proposed by the Ad Hoc Committee as paragraph 5
of Article 44:
"The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to any business
practice required by a Member, to the extent that such practice
is essential to the carrying out of actions specifically permitted
and subjected to control under Chapter IV or VI or any other
Chapter of this Charter."
2. The new draft to be proposed by the Ad Hoc Committee in respect to the
words "described in paragraph 1 of Article 44", in paragraph 2 of
Article 45.
3. The new draft of paragraph l (f) of Article 50, proposed by the Ad Hoc
Committee:
"The Members recognize that certain services such as transportation,
telecommunications, insurance and the commercial services of banks
[banking] are substantial elements of international trade and that
any restrictive business practices [in relation to them] by
enterprises engaged in these activities in international trade may
have harmful effects similar to those described in paragraph 1 of
Article 44. Such practices shal be dealt with in accordance with
the following paragraphs of this Article".
4. The amendment proposed by the delegation of Mexico for the addition of
a new sub-paragraph (d) to paragraph 1, Article 51 (No. 60 of
E/CONF.2/C.4/4) as follows:
"(d) Governmental measures connected with the provision referred
to in the previous Article".
5. The new draft of paragraph 2 of Article 45 to be submitted by the Ad Hoc
Committee pursuant to the remarks presented to the Sub-Committee, in respect.
of the words "in paragraph 1 of Article 44" and the words whether engaged
in by private or public enterprises". |
GATT Library | gn295hc9866 | Sub-Committee A. Draft agenda prepared by the Secretriat for the Thirteenth Meeting. : To be Held 20 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 29, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 29/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/12, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gn295hc9866 | gn295hc9866_90200012.xml | GATT_155 | 291 | 2,069 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.4/A/12
ON DU 29 December1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FOURTH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE A
DRAFT AGENDA PREPARED BY THE SECRETRIAT FOR THE THIRTEENTH MEETING
To be Held 20 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
1. The amendment proposed by the delegations of Argentina and Mexico
for the deletion of Article 50 (No. 53 of E/CONF.2/C. 4/4).
2. The amendment proposed by the delegation Ceylon for the delstion
of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 50 (No. 54 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4)
3. The amedmant proposed by the delegation of Ecuador for the
deletion of the word "telecommunication" in paragraph 1 of
Article 50.
4. The reservations premented by the delegations of Norway and France
in respect of Article 50, (No. 56 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4).
5. The amendment t proposed by the delegation of Mexico-for the addition.
of the following sub-paragraph to paragraph 1 of Article. 51
(No. 59 of E/CONF,2/0.4/4),
"c. practices angaged in by Central Banks for the-purpose
of regulating credit and the circulation of money; and"
6. The amendment proposed by the delegation of mexico for the addition
of a new sub-paragraph (d) to paragraph 1, Article 51 (No. 60 of
E/CONF.2/C.4/4) as follows:
"(d.) Governmental measures connacted with the-provision
referred to in the previous Article"
7. The amandment proposed by the
of thye following text to paragraph 1, Article 44, sub-paragraph (o)
paragraph 2 of Article 44, sub-paragraph (a) paragraph 3 of
Article 44, sub-paragraph (1), (ii) and (iii) of sub-paragraph 1
of Article 46-and-sub-paragraph (b) paragraph 2 of Article 46
(No. 2, 13, 14 and 43 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4):
"or the provision of services such as banking, insurances,
transportation and telecommunication, which are intimataly
connected with intarnational trade". |
GATT Library | kd651hk6739 | Sub-Committee A : Draft Agenda Prepered by the Secretariet for the Seventh Meeting to be held 13 December at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 12, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 12/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/7, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/kd651hk6739 | kd651hk6739_90200007.xml | GATT_155 | 628 | 4,118 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.4/A/7
ON DU 12 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL : ENGLISH
FOURH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE
Draft Agenda Prepered by the Secretariet for the
Seventh Meeting to be held 13 December at 10.30 a.m.
A. CONTINUATION OF THE CONSIDERATION OF THE AMEDNMENTS PROPOSING THAT IN
CHAPTER 5, NO REFERENCE BE MADE TO PUBLIC ENTERPRISES. THESE
AMENDMENTS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Deletion of the words: "whether engaged in by private or public
enterprises" in paragraph 1, Article 44, and paragraph 1;
Article 45. Amendments proposed by the delegations of Argentina
and Mexico, (No. 1, 4, 25 and 26 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4).
2. Deletion of the words "or public" in sub-paragraph b, paragraph 2,
Article 44. Amendments proposed by the delegations of Argentina
and Mexico, (No. 11 and 12 of E/CONF.4/4).
3. Deletion of the words "between public commercial enterprises or.,
between private and public commercial enterprises" in
sub-paragraph B, paragraph 2, Article 44. Amendment proposed by
the delegation of Argentine (No. 11 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4)
4. Deletion of the words: "or by a combination, agreement or other
arrangement between commercial enterprises, whether between
private commercial enterprises, between public commercial
enterprises, or between private and public commercial enterprises"
in sub-paragaph (1) of paragraph 2, Article 44. Amendment
proposed by the delegation of Mexico. (No.12 of E/CONF.2/0.4/4)
5. Deletion of the words "private and public" in paragraph 1,
Article 47. Amendment proposed by the delegations of Argentina
and Mexic. (No. 44 and. 45 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4)
6. Deletion of the words "provided that in the case of a complaint
against a single public commercial enterprise acting independently,
such complaint may be presented only by a Member on its own behalf
and only after the Member has resorted to the procedure under
paragraph 1 of this Article", in paragraph 2, Article 45.
Amendment proposed. by the delegation of Argentine
(No. 27 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4).
/7. Deletion E /CONF. 2 /C .4/A /7
Page 2
7. Deletion of paragraph 4 of Article 44 proposed by the delegation
of Argentina (No. 23 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4).
8. The new text of paragraph 4, Article 44 proposed by the delegation
of Mexico (No. 24 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4).
9. Addition of the words: "subject to the provisions of paragraph 4
of this Article", to paragraph 1, Article 44, to paragraph 2 of
the same Article, and to paragraph 1 of Article 47. Amendments
Proposed by the delegation of Mexico, (No. 4, 8, 21 and 45
E/CONF .2/C .4/4).
10. Addition of the word "other than the exceptions provided for
in paragraph 4 of Article 44". Amendment proposed by the
delegation of Mexico, in paragraph 8, Article 45, (No. 38 of
E/CONF.2/C.4/4).
11. Deletion of the word "concerned" and: addition of the words
referred to in paragraph 8 in paragraph 9, Article 45. Amendment
Proposed, by the delegation of Mexico (No. 40, of E/CONF.2/C.4/4).
B. RECONSIDERATION OF THE NEW DRAFT OF ARTICLES I.j and. 45 (a), in
connection with the Amendmente proposed by the delegation of Mexico,
for addition of:
(a) The following text et the and of paragraph 1 of Article 45
(No. 25 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4): "the members invited to take part in
a consultation shall be chosen in equal numbers from each groúp
pro-posed for this purpose by the parties affected. by the dispute".
(b) The following words in paragraph 4 of Article 45: "after
hearing the opinion of the Members referred to in the final part
of paragraph 1 of this Article". (No. 29 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4).
C. RECONSIDERATION OF NEW DRAFT OF ARTICLE 48, presented by the
representative of the United Kingdom.
D. RECONSIDERATION OF THE NEW DRAFT OF PARAGRAPHS 1 and 2, of ARTICLE 44,
proposed by the delegation of Norway. (No. 5 and 9 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4) |
GATT Library | xf799cy2670 | Sub-Committee A : Draft Agenda Prepered by the Secretariet for the Seventh Meeting to be held 13 December at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 12, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 12/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/7, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xf799cy2670 | xf799cy2670_90200007.xml | GATT_155 | 0 | 0 | |
GATT Library | zh047xv1366 | Sub-Committee A. Explanatory note by the Delegation of Uruguay for distribution to the members of Sub-Committee A of the Fifth Committee | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 15, 1947 | Fifth Committee: Inter-Governmental Commodity Agreements | 15/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.5/A/2 and E/CONF. 2/C. 5/1-19 C. 5/A/1-2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zh047xv1366 | zh047xv1366_90200071.xml | GATT_155 | 239 | 1,706 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.5/A/2
ON DU 15 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EPLOI ORIGINAL: SPANISH
FIFTH COMMITTEE: INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMODITY AGREEMENTS
SUB-COMMITTEE A
EXPLANATORY NOTE BY THE DELEGATION OF URUGUAY FOR DISTRIBUTION TO THE
MEMBERS OF SUB-COMMITTEE A OF THE FIFTH COMMITTEE
Having considered the compromise amendment submitted to Sub-Committee A
by the United Kingdom, the delegation of Uruguay is unable to accept it as
a substitute, because it does not deal with the problem that the Uruguayan
amendment is intended to solve. The reference to Article 59 contained in
the third paragraph is in fact limited to control agreements and to cases
in which a surplus develops without effective increase in demand.
But the Uruguayan amendment is more concerned with other types of
agreements provided for in Article 58 than with control agreements, and
with the achievement of objective (e) of Article 54 in case of disequilibrium
caused by under production. Consequently, the delegation of Uruguay cannot
agree to withdraw its amendment, but it considers that it would be useful
to include the proposed amendment to paragraph 3, submitted to Sub-Committee A
by the United Kingdom, in the Charter.
With regard to its own amendment, the delegation of Uruguay thinks it
advisable to define the meaning exactly, by the following modification of
the text: "(b) the standard mechanical equipment required for producing
the product referred to in paragraph (a) of this Article." |
GATT Library | yy183wd4308 | Sub-Committee 'A'. Note on use of the term "Substantial Interest" in chapter VI | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 12, 1947 | Fifth Committee: Inter-Governmental Commodity Agreements | 12/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.5/A/1 and E/CONF. 2/C. 5/1-19 C. 5/A/1-2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/yy183wd4308 | yy183wd4308_90200070.xml | GATT_155 | 1,071 | 7,555 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE
ON DU E/CONF.2/C.5/A/1
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 12 December 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FIFTH COMMITTEE: INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMODITY AGREEMENTS
SUB-COMMITTEE 'A'
NOTE ON USE OF THE TERM "SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST" IN CHAPTER VI
This paper is prepared by the Secretariat to assis the members themobrae of the
Suebi-Comeitteonl throri corfidoatlni orm use of the termoxthe unffof the te=
t" in "subattxt'al intseie' Chapter VI frr Thi matter was: reeed to the
SubCitte ting n tbe Sifxth oM-eefI` tee FiîthenCcmitee (se. dcumat
C /SEe, There aZreset out nces ibelow the instacQa the Chapter where .the
term "substaisntiad. interest" luse.
1, StdYGrU
paragraph 1 55,; paeX&ph 1i
"An member which is substasntially intere6ed..,,.shall be
enthajitlsed to ask t aommodity tudy of the c be made."
ragraph 2Artcle 55, pavhg
.o. the Organizatin shall ....... invite each Member to -
appoint representatives to a studMembery group...if the 1amber
considers that it is substantially interested .... "
ote: luthe fIrt of these instances (Article 55,
mparagmph ) tjhe ter= s iused. obJetively, 1..
thluere mushowing t boan evahiion ehwin tha thie
is interet ofj a mfembesr slennough to Jstii iteaeim-
that a study bage made, whereas in parraph 2 of
Articlerm'5 tho seof the te= isof a subjective
ember -atI.. , i.e., tbecided whether. its interest
substantial enoustanding gh to warrant amling a
representative to a study group.
2, Comodity Conference.
1Article 56, arar i
"....,ofr at the request oe Mstemberes whsose intre reprsent
......a shubstantial le ganization maly also . calU
such a conference onnformation the basis of iiation agreed to be adequate
by the Membrs -bstant"iaïl interested .;..
|N^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ioe: E/CONF.2/C .5/A/1
Page 2
Note: In this paragraph the use of "substantial" is objective
in both instances In the first instance the Organization
would have to decide ecVie objectively If the interst of' members
requestingf a coenerenci, fdid n act represent a "substantial"
part of the world. productiosn, conumption of or trade in
tmhe comoIndity. the second instance, the Organization
first would iret have to decide objectively which Members were
ubeantially interested, and then consult and eobtain thsi
agreerment regading the adequeacyf ofa th inormtion on the
basis of which it wished to call a conference non its ow
initiative. (Whethesr or not uch agrseement mut be
nisanimous lnot clear).
36Article paragraph 2
Each Maber which considers thiast it l ubstantially intrested....
..l..al be invited.
Note: In the context of this paragraph "substantially interested."
i subjective, i.e. each Member which consisderself"eita"
substantiially nteerestd.. It emay b noted, however, that the
present text might be realid to mit invitation to Members
who have already decided that they are "substantially
interested",
3mming. Su up on Sgtudy roup and Conference procedure
lIt wisl be eem that in both study group amnd comodity conferences
(a) the right to request meetisngs i based. on the Organization' s
obective decision" on Iubstantial interest", and
(bh) te right to attesnd si baed on the Member's subjectiive vew on
itsb "sustalnittiaest .ner"
4. Thinbe Pciple ofq Adeuate Participatiion n Agreementsi by mporters and
Exporters:
Article 5a7, pragraph 1, saub pragraph (d)
. sch agreements shall include provision for adequate
participation of countries substantially interested. in its exportation
and production."
Note: The use of the term "substantially interested." in this
paragraph would seem to be objective. It will be up to
Members, in concluding an agreement, to decide objectively
which countries are substantially interested in importation
or consumption in exportation or production and then
ensure that there is provision for adequate participation
/by both E/CONF.2/C.5/A/1
Page 3
by both groups, In examining a particular agreement,
however, the Organization might wish to make an objective
decision whether a particular agreement conformed with the
Charter in these respects.
5. The Exception to the Commodity Conference Procedure for Control
Agreements:ts:
atcle 58, p aragraph 6
.... Members subsantially tMy interested .....m ay proceed by
dirnegotiationect gotiation ...... "
Noite: "Subtantllly interested" in this case would appear to
be primarily subjective because where certain Members
decided that thcey should proeed with direct negotiations,
this woul imply that theeys regarded thmelves as
substantially interested", However on appeal, in regard
to an agreement so concluded, the Organizhation might ave
to ake an objective decision on the point.
6. Determginations reairrding the Ccumstances governing the use of
CoanodityConmetrol Agreeits:
Arptricle 29, aagraph 2
"Determinations ....... shall be made throughithe Organzation by
consultation and agreement among Members suy itantiall interested......"
Note:i Under ths paragraph the Organization would be called.
upon to decide objectively on "substanestial intert" before
deciding which Members were entitled to engage in such
consultation. In this connection mthe Sub-Comittee may
wish to consimder the Comittee's discussion of the proposal
by the delegate of Ceylon to delete paragraph 2 of
Article 59 (docuRment C.5/S.6). If tmhe Sub-Comittee
decides that these determinations should. be made within
the conference, the present text presents one complication
in that the membership of a conference is based on a
subjective interpretations of "substantial interest" in
accordance with Article 56, paragraph 2 and not on the
objective interpretation implied in Article 59, paragraph 2,
7. Other: Reference
Article 59, paragraph 1g. sub-pararaph (a)
.lw cng wshom are amll producers who account for a substantial
......"portionA t9'
Article 55 E/CONF.2/C.5/A/1
Page 4
Article 59, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph (b) aub a (b)
ntial reduction in price does notntià1. yteoq , .pVco doos Iot
increase in consumption..." thess eub.paraps does
tantial" in these sub-paragraphs doesnot e$'n.fel in
related to the other references in ought dQeimble.
may nevertheless be thought desirable
to substitute another term, e.g. "appreciable", in
order to avoid to any confusion.
8. General Note There would seem to be various possibilities::o be various possibilities:.
ially o use the "t subjectively erm "substtlally iterested.' bJictiv'el throughout
the.Chapter; or
(b) to iu wse the ter objectively throughout. (Thl"uld involve a
ider biiai for defilenition tÈaà present implIed Artic1l 56 ).
For example, factoors whsidc. might be taken into acccntobeles a
oIt's. proportionate sshare of world production, coniumpion or
trasde i a co«ditty,are m(1) itB poduction or consuption of the
cooditit-yexpprsse. a a proporîeiooiif iits national incom, (11)ts
itrade ins the coioty eprèaseds s a lprôpde)ôrto of ite tot1 tra; or
(c) to confine the use ofa the term "substantilly interested" to
Wherej its intention is obseillcitive - this might t nvolve a wider
baasssigs for efIition, 4`ugsted in (b). beoverm and to use tho ez
d"vitlly itereete, where-i the intention ls sbjective. |
GATT Library | bk102st1542 | Sub-Committee 'A'. Notes of the Eleventh Meeting. : Held at Havana, on Tuesday 23 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 23, 1947 | Fifth Committee: Inter-Governmental Commodity Agreements | 23/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.5/W.4 and E/CONF. 2/C. 5/W. 1-6 C. 56/W. 1-3 WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bk102st1542 | bk102st1542_90200075.xml | GATT_155 | 148 | 1,107 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.5/W.4
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 23 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
FIFTH COMMITTEE: INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMODITY AGREEMENTS
SUB-COMMITTEE 'A'
NOTES OF THE ELEVENTH MEETING
Held at Havana, on Tuesday 23 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. R. B. SCHWENGER (United States)
1. Consideration of Report to the Fifth Committee
The Sub-Committee agreed upon the text of its Report to the
Fifth Committee, and upon the text of Chapter VI to be recommended.
2. Presentation of Report
The CHAIRMAN, Mr. Schwenger, announced that there was a possibility
that he might be absent from the Conference at the time the Report of the
Sub-Committee was presented to the Fifth Committee. He requested that an
alternate be chosen who could in that event present the report. Mr. de VRIES
(Netherlands) was selected to act for the Sub-Committee in this matter. |
GATT Library | sr275sn5602 | Sub-Committee 'A'. Notes of the Ninth Meeting. : Held at Havana on Saturday, 20 December 1947 at 2.30 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 20, 1947 | Fifth Committee: Inter-Governmental Commodity Agreements | 20/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.5/W.2 and E/CONF. 2/C. 5/W. 1-6 C. 56/W. 1-3 WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/sr275sn5602 | sr275sn5602_90200073.xml | GATT_155 | 363 | 2,528 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 20 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
FIFTH COMMITTEE: INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMODITY AGREEMENTS
SUB-COMMITTEE 'A'
NOTES OF THE NINTH MEETING
Held at Havana on Saturday, 20 December 1947 at 2.30 p.m.
Article 65
In order to give effect to the proposal by the delegation of Argentina
to amend paragraph 1, the sub-committees agreed that the third paragraph
of paragraph 1 should read
"If after review the Organization finds that any such agreement
is inconsistent with the provisions of this Chapter, it shall
communicate such findings to the Members concerned in order to secure
promptly the adjustment of the agreement to bring it into
conformity with the provisions of this Chapter."
Consequent on this change the second sentence of paragraph 2 was amended
to read
"If, after review, the Organization finds that any such negotiations
are inconsistent with the provisions of this Chapter, it shall
communicate such finding to the Members concerned in order to secure
prompt action with regard to their continued participation in such
negotiation."
Article 67
1. In regard to the amendment previously agreed pursuant to the Norwegian
proposal it was pointed out that a comparable exemption would be needed in
Chapter IV. It was agreed that the matter should be brought to the attention
of the Committee dealing with that Chapter.
2. The amendment proposed by the United States was considered and discussion
deferred.
Article 56
In line 1 of paragraph 2 it was agreed to substitute the word "itself"
for the words "that it is", in order to secure consistency with the new text
of Article 55.
/Proposed E/CONF.2/C.5/W.2
Page 2
Proposed New Article
The Sub-Committee considered. the proposal of the delegation of Colombia
to insert a new Article after Article 67. This was designed to allow Member
countries, whose economies depend essentially on the export of certain primary
commodities, to adopt measures to defend the prices of these commodities against
the effect of pronounced short-term fluctuations in foreign markets. The
CHAIRMAN suggested that delegates might give thought to the question raised
by the Colombian delegate of the relation of the short-term fluctuations to
the Charter. |
GATT Library | pn931zy8446 | Sub-Committee `A'. Notes on the Tenth Meeting. : Held at Havana on Monday, 22 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 22, 1947 | Fifth Committee: Inter-Governmental Commodity Agreements | 22/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.5/W.3 and E/CONF. 2/C. 5/W. 1-6 C. 56/W. 1-3 WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/pn931zy8446 | pn931zy8446_90200074.xml | GATT_155 | 459 | 3,244 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.5/W.3
ON DU 22 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FIFTH COMMITTEE: INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMODITY AGREEMENTS
SUB-COMMITTEE 'A'
NOTES ON THE TENTH MEETING
Held at Havana on Monday, 22 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Article 67 - Exceptions to Provisions relating to Inter-governmental
Commodity Agreements
.
The Sub-Committee reached general agreement:
1. That the Charter should be amended to make clear that it was
intended to have an exception for action taken in concert as well
as action taken unilaterally, applying to the requirements of
national security - in whatever way the reference to national
security might appropriately be drafted.
2. That it was desirable that the exception be drafted as
narrowly as possible.
3. That decisions as to
(a) the drafting of the exceptions, and
(b) its location in the Charter,
might best be taken in connection with the discussion of the related
portion of Article 94, though not necessarily by the Committee responsible
for that Article,
4. That the Sub-Committee had before it for discussion the following
two texts:
Proposal 1 - the addition of the following sub-paragraph:
"(e) to any inter-governmental commodity agreement, or
any provision in such an agreement, made to meet the
essential requirements of national security."
Proposal 2 - (i) The addition of the following sub-paragraph:
"(e) to any inter-governmental agreement concluded solely
for the purpose of the non-commercial accumulation of
reserves of primary commodities for military purposes
or of the expansion of facilities for the production of
such primary commodities: Provided that any Member,
not being a party to such agreement, may bring a
complaint that its commercial interests are seriously
prejudiced by the operation of the agreement and the
/Organization, E/CONF.2/C.5/W.3
Page 2
Organization, if it so finds, shall request the
participating Members to consult with the complaining
Member in order to safeguard the latter's commercial
interests."
(ii) The addition of the following new paragraph 2
"Any Member accumulating non-commercial reserves of
primary commodities for military purposes under an
inter-governmental agreement, to which Article 67 (1) (e)
applies, shall not make arrangements for the commercial
liquidation of such reserve stocks in such a way as to
injure the commercial interests of producers of the
commodities in question, and shall consult with the
Organization as to the best means to that end."
It was agreed to note that the understanding of the Committee was that
the narrow drafting mentioned in part 2 might include the provision of
safeguards.
Article 58 - Types of Agreement
The Sub-Committee agreed to a number of drafting changes too paragraphs 5
and 6 of this Article.
Proposed New Article
Further consideration was given to the relation of short-term market
fluctuations to the provisions of Chapter VI. |
GATT Library | wv653qt1580 | Sub-Committee A. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 24, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 24/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.4, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/wv653qt1580 | wv653qt1580_90200026.xml | GATT_155 | 669 | 4,432 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W. 4
ON DU 24 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FOURTH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE A
REPORT OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE
The Ad Hoc Committee of Sub-Committee A submits to the Sub-Committee
the following proposals for consideration and further discussion. In
submitting these proposals the members of the Ad Hoc Committee do not
necessarily commit their delegations to them:
Article 44
2. (c) "Such commercial enterprises, individually or collectively,
posses effective control of trade among a number of countries in one
or more products."
4. (b) trading enterprises mainly or wholly owned by public authority
and over which there is effective control by public authority, including
control of engagements in a practice listed in paragraph 3 of this
Article.
5. "Any business practices described in this Article, insofar as they
are specifically subjected to control by the provisions of Chapter IV
and VI or any other Chapter of this Charter, shell not be subject to the
procedures of this Chapter",
Article 45 A
1. "Any affected Member acting on its own behalf or any Member on
behalf of any affected person, enterprise or organization within that
Member's jurisdiction, may present a written complaint to the
Organization that in any particular instance a practice exists (whether
engaged in by private or public enterprises) which has or is about to
have the effect described in paragraph 1 of Article 44. Provided that
in the case of complaints against a single public commercial enterprise
acting independently of any other enterprise such complaints may be
presented only by a Member on its own behalf and only after the Member
has resorted to the procedure in Article 45."
7. "Provided that if the Organization finds that the practices
concerned have the effect and are as described in Article 44 and have
been specifically required by law, the provisions in paragraph 7, 8, 9
and 10 of this Article shall not apply, and the complaining Member shall
/have E/CONF. 2/C,4/A/W.4
Page 2
have further recourse only in accordance with the procedures provided
in Chapter VIII or other relevant provisions of this Charter".
Article 47
1. "Each Member shall take all possible measures by legislation or
otherwise, in accordance with its constitution or system of law end
economic organization, to ensure within its juriadiction that private
and public commercial enterprses do not engage in practices which have
the effect and are as described in Article 44, and in addition it shall
assist the Organization in preventing these practices".
Article 50 - Procedure with Respect to Services
1. "The Members recognize that certain services such as transportation,
telecommunications, insurance and the commercial services of banks are
substantial elements of international trade and that any restrictive
business practices by enterprises engaged in these activities in
international trade may have harmful effects similar to those described
in paragraph 1 of Article 44. Such practices shall be dealt with in
accordance with the following paragraphs of this Article".
2. Substitute "and shall afford" for the words "with a view to affording."
Article 51
It is recommended that, in view of the alteration proposed in
Article 44 (5), Article 51 should be deleted.
NOTE IN CONNECTION WITH THE INTERPRETATION OF THE WORDS "DECIDE" AND "DECISION"
The Ad Hoc Comittee recommends that the following statement be inserted
in the report of the Sub-Committee to the Fourth Committeo to clarify and
define the meaning of the words "decide" and "decision" as they are used
throughout Chapter V:
"The words 'decide' end 'decisiont as used in Articles 44, 45A
(except in paragraphs 3 and 4) and 47 relate to a conclusion whether
or not particular practices have had, have or are about to have the
harmful effects described in paragraph 1 of Article 44. Such 'decisions'
of the Organization shall not be construed as binding the legislative,
executive or Judicial authorities of a Member State. Members:
obligations regarding these 'decisions' are set out in paragraph 4 of
Article 47." |
GATT Library | vw906rm2976 | Sub-Committee A. Summary record of Fiftenth Meeting. : 23 December 1947 at 10.3O a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 23, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 23/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.3, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/vw906rm2976 | vw906rm2976_90200025.xml | GATT_155 | 309 | 2,094 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE RESTRICTED
ON DU E /CONF.2 /C.4/A/W. 3
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 23 December 1947
FOURTH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB -COMMITTEE A
SUMMARY RECORD OF FIFTENTH MEETING
23 December 1947 at 10.3O a.m.
The Sub-Committee continued the discussion of the Amendments submitted
by the delegation of Ceylon and by the delegation of Ecuador in connection
with Articles 44 and 50 (Nos. 2, 13, 14, 54 and 55 of E/CONF.2/C.4/4).
The delegate of Ceylon stated that his country had suffered because of the
restrictive practices of some services and he was of the opinion that
control over services should be strengthened in the Charter. The delegations
of Belgium, Canada, India, Iraq, United States and the United Kingdom all
expressed themselves in favour of keeping the text of Article 50
substantially the same as it now reads.
The delegate of Belgium suggested that in the report of the
Sub-Committee to the Full Committee an interpretative explanation be included
to clarify the meaning of paragraph 1, of Article 50 in regard to what type
of services are intended to be included within the provisions of this
Article.
The delegate from Ecuador, after hearing various explanations from
members of the Sub-Committee, stated that if it was made specifically clear
that Article 50 would not interfere with the operation of telecommunications
by the governments of Member States, he would consider the advisability of
withdrawing his amendment.
The Ad Hoc Committee submitted a report to the Sub-Committee together
with several proposed drafts applicable to Articles 44 and 47. The
Sub-Committee desired more time to study the proposed drafts and discussion
of these was postponed to the next meeting. The Ad Hoc Committee was
directed by the Chairman to study the text of Article 50 with a view
to effecting a compromise between the divergent viewpoints expressed. |
GATT Library | yh898tj9835 | Sub-Committee A. Summary record of Seventeenth Meeting. : Held at the Capitol, Ravana, Cuba, on 31 December 1947, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 31, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 31/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.6, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/yh898tj9835 | yh898tj9835_90200028.xml | GATT_155 | 474 | 3,157 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.4/A/
ON DU w.6
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 31 December 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FOURH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICE
SUB-COMMITTEE A
SUMMARY RECORD OF SEVENTEENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Ravana, Cuba, on 31 December 1947, at 10.30 a.m.
The Ad. Hoc Committee submitted a new compromise draft for paragraph 5
of Article 44, but discussion of this draft was postponed to allow the
delegations more time to study its provisions.
The following revised paragraph 2 of Article 45 (now paragraph 1
of Article 45A) was tentatively adopted by the Sub-Committee, pending
a further recommendatioon of the Ad Hoc Committee on whether to delete
or to retain the words whetherer engaged in by private or public
commercial. enterprises)":
"[A complaint may be presented in writing to the Organization by]
any affected Member on its own behalf or any Member on behalf of any
affected person, enterprise or organization within that Member's
juriedtation may present a written complaint to the Organization
that in any particular instance a practice exists (whether engaged
in by private or public commercial enterprises) which has or is
about to have the effect described in pargaraph 1 of Article 44.
Provided. that in the case of (a) complaints against a single public
commercial enterprise acting independently of any other enterprise
such complaints may be presented only by a Member on its own behalf
and only after the Member has resorted to the procedure [under
paragraph 1 of this Article in Article 45".
The addition of the following text at the end of paragraph 8
of Article 45 (now paragraph 7, Article 45 A) was approved by the
Sub-Committee:
"Provided that if the Organizatlon finds that the practices
concerned have the effect and are as described in Article 44 and have
been specifically required by law, the provisions in paragraphs 7, 8,
9 and 10 of this Article shall not apply, and the complain Member
shall have further recourse only in accordance with the procedures
provided in Chapter VIII or other relevant Drovisions of this Charter".
/The Sub-Committee E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.6
Page 2
The Sub-Committee approved the following revised paragraph 1 of
Article 47:
"1. Each Member shall take all possible measures by legislation
or otherwise, in accordance with Its constitution or system of
law and economic organization, to ensure within its jurisdiction
that private aid public commercial enterprises do, not engage
in practices which have the effect and are as described in
Article 44, and in addition it shell assist the organization
in preventing these practices[such assistance to be given in
accordance with the timbers system of law and economic
organization]
The final change approved by the Sub-Committee at this meeting was
the substitution of the words "and shall afford" for the words "with
a view to affording" in paragraph 2 of Article 50. |
GATT Library | cs417jm0671 | Sub-Committee A. Summary record of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Meetings. : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 31 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m. and 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 31, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 31/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.7, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/cs417jm0671 | cs417jm0671_90200030.xml | GATT_155 | 338 | 2,328 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.7
ON DU 31 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FOURTH COMMITTEE : RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE A
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE EIGHTEENTH AND NINETEENTH MEETINGS
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba,
on 31 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m. and 4.00 p.m.
The Sub-Committee, after careful consideration approved the following
explanatory statement which is intended to clarify and define the meaning of
the words decided and "decision" as they are used in Chapter V:
"The words 'decide' and 'decision' (constate' and 'constatation' in the
French text) as used in Articles 44, 45A (except in paragraphs 3 and 4)
and 47 relate to conclusions by the Organization whether or not
particular practices have had, have or are about to have the harmful
effects described in paragraph 1 of Article 44, and do not prescribe
the obliLations of Members.'Members' obligations regarding these
'decisions' are set out in the relevant paragraphs of Article 47.
Therefore, such decisions' (or 'constatations') are not to be construed
as binding the legislative- executive or Judicial activities of Member
States".
The delegate of Argentina, supported by the representative of Mexico, proposed
that this statement be inserted as part of the text of Chapter V, preferably
as a new paragraph 7 to Article 47, or at least as a footnote to the Chapter.
The Sub)-Committee agreed that the explanatory statement should be
included on the export of the Sub-Committee to the Fourth Committee. However,
since several of the delegations were not ready to present their views on the
Argentine proposal to insert a footnote into the text of the Charter, this
matter was postponed for future consideration.
The delegation of Canada submitted a new draft text which he proposed
adding as paragraph 11 in the new Article 45A.
The Sub-Committee examined this draIt, several other drafts presented
by the Ad Hoc Committee, and a proposal made by the United States delegation,
but reached no conclusion and postponed consideration of this subject until
the next meeting. |
GATT Library | gz585qj1178 | Sub-Committee A. Summary record of the Fourteenth Meeting. : 22 December 1947 at 10.30 am | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 22, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 22/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.2, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gz585qj1178 | gz585qj1178_90200024.xml | GATT_155 | 330 | 2,235 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W. 2
ON DU 22 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FOURTH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE A
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FOURTEENTH MEETING
22 December 1947 at 10.30 am.
The Ad-Hoc Committee submitted a preliminary verbal report and stated
that while they had tentatively agreed on several draft amendments to
Articles 44, 45-A (new) and 47, they wished to postpone presentation of a
formal report until other interested delegations had had the opportunity
of discussing the proposed texte with the Ad-Hoc Committee.
The next subjects discussed were the amendment proposed by the
delegation of Ceyclon for the deletion of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Article 50
and the amendment proposed by the delegation of Ecuador for the deletion
of the word "Telecommunications" in paragraph 1 of Article 50 (Nos. 54
and 55 of E/C0NF.2/C.4/4). The delegate of Ceylon spoke in support of his
amendment and stated that he could see no reason why services should not
come within the provisions of Article 44 and be dealt with in the same
manner as commercial products.
The representatives of Brazil and India supported the position that
public services should be included within the scope of Chapter V, but
were in favour of retaininh the present text of Article 50. The
Sub-Committee agreed that Article 50 was a compromise between two opposite
view points, to effect some measure of concilation and to afford some
indirect control over services in general. There appeared to be some
divergences of view points in the sub-committee as to how far services
actually came within the scope of Chapter V.
The representative for Ecuador explained that his amendment to delete
the word "telecommunications"' from Article 50 was prompted by the fact that
telecommunications in Ecuador had, for the past three years been successfully
operated as a governmental agency, and for that reason he was not in favour
of telecommunications being included in Article 50. |
GATT Library | xd544xg9305 | Sub-Committee A. Summary record of the Sixteenth Meeting. : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 29 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 29, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 29/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.5, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xd544xg9305 | xd544xg9305_90200027.xml | GATT_155 | 368 | 2,518 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.5
ON DU 29 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
FOURTH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE SIXTEENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 29 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
The Sub-Committee received the report of the Ad Hoc Committee
(document E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W.4) and. considered the proposed changes submitted
in connection with Article 44.
The Sub-Committee unanimously agreed to accept the recommendation of the
Ad Hoc Committee to substitute the words "among a number of countries" for the
words "between two or more countries" in sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph 2,
Article 44. It was also unanimously agreed by the Sub-Committee to add the
word "trading" before the word "enterprise" at the beginning of sub-paragraph
(b) of paragraph 4, Article 44, with the proviso that explanations of the
reasons for these chances be included in the report of the Sub-Committee to
the Fourth Committee.
The next item discussed was the proposal to add the following paragraph
to Article 44, and to delete Article 51:
"Any business practices described in this Article, insofar as they
are specifically subjected to control by the provisions of Chapter IV
and VI or any other Chapter of this Charter, shall not be subject to
the procedures of this Chapter".
The delegate of Norway, supported by the delegates of Mexico and the
United Kingdom wished to change the word "procedures" in the last line of the
proposed text to the word "provisions". Their general position was that as
the text now read, the provisions of Chapter V could be interpreted as
applying to business practices which were specifically subjected to control
by the provisions of other Chapters of the Charter, and that this could lead
to a conflict where such practices were covered by two Chapters in the Charter.
The delegate of Canada, however, was of the opinion that although the
procedures of Chapter V would not apply, nevertheless the general provisions
concerning the obligations of members to refrain from restrictive business
practices should be taken into consideration.
The Chairman referred the proposed text of paragraph 5 back to the Ad
Hoc Committee with instructions to find a compromise draft. |
GATT Library | fm918nq8631 | Sub-Committee A. Summary record of Thirteenth Meeting. : 20 December 1947, at 10:30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 20, 1947 | Committee IV: Restrictive Business Practices | 20/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W/1, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/fm918nq8631 | fm918nq8631_90200023.xml | GATT_155 | 327 | 2,458 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.4/A/W/1
ON DU 20 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
COMMITTEE IV: RESTRICTED BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE A
SUMMARY RECORD OF THIRTEENTH MEETING
20 December 1947, at 10:30 a.m.
The first subject discussed was the amendment proposed by the
delegation of Maxico for the addition of the following sub-paragraph to
Paragraph 1 of Article 51:
"(c) practices engaged in by Central Banks for the purpose of
regulating credit and the circulation of money; and".
The delegate of Mexico stated that the regulations precribed by his
country for the restriction of credit and the circulation of money might
be considered as inconsistent with the provisions of Chapter V, and his
amendment was submitted with the intention of clarifying the text on this
point. He was supported. by the delegates of Argentina, Ecuador and Colombia.
The United States delegate, supported by the United Kingdom took the
position that further modification of the text was necessary as the
interpretation was clear in this respect. After further discussion, however,
the United States delegate proposed that the Mexican amendment, if considered
necessary, be extended to include other governmental credit institutions ard
agencies. The Chairman directed the Ad-Hoc Committee, which had been
established at a previous meeting and was composed of Belgium, Canada, Mexico
and the United Kingdon, to examine the proposed amendment and. present
alternative re-drafts. The delegate of the United States was also asked to
participate in the work of the Ad-Hoc Committee.
The next item taken up by the Sub-Committee was the consideration of
amendments to Article 50. The Argentine delegate spoke in favour or his
amendment for the suppression of Article 50. His delegation considered that
Article 50 was not compatible with the constitutional structure of Argentina
because it appears to be applicable to services which, in his country, were
tightly interrelated with the State itself. He would enter a reservation if
the Argentina amendment was not accepted. |
GATT Library | yg778tf0262 | Sub-Committee B (Article 18A) of Committee III-a | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 16, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 16/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/B/1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A-E | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/yg778tf0262 | yg778tf0262_90190332.xml | GATT_155 | 126 | 905 | United Nations
CONFERECE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE E/CONF.2 /C.3/B /1
CONFERENCE 16 December 1947
DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ImL G.S
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE B (ARTICLE 18A) of C0MMITTEE III-a
The Sub-Committee was appointed by Committee IIl-a at the meeting
of 15 December 1947, to consider and make recommendations upon the
Norwegian proposal (document E/CONF.2/C.3/1/Add.39) for the insertion
of a new Article 18A. The Sub-Committee is coL)osed of the delegations
of Argentina, France, Greece, India, Norway, South Africa, United Kiigdom
and Venezuela.
AGENDA FOR THE FIRST MEETING
To be Held Wednesday, 17 December 1947, at 10.30 a.m.
1. Election of Chairman
2. Other business
3. Proposed new Article 18A - Item 76 of the Revised Annotated Agenda
(document E/CCF.2/C.3/6). |
GATT Library | tt473bx4259 | Sub-Committee C of Committee III on General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 to 39) | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 20, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 20/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/22 and E/CONF.2/C.3/10-38 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/tt473bx4259 | tt473bx4259_90190114.xml | GATT_155 | 108 | 901 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
UNRESTRICTED
E/CONF .2/C.3/22
20 December 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMlTTEE III ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(Articles 32 to 39)
1. In its fifteenth meeting, on 19 December, Committee III appointed
the representatives of the following fifteen countries to form Sub-Committee
C of Committee III on Section E of Chapter IV:
Afghanistan Mexico
Argentina Netherlands
Australia Norway
Canada Pakistan
Cuba Portugal
France United Kingdom
Lebanon United States
Uruguay
2. The first meeting of this Sub-Committee will be held on Monday,
22 December, at 10.30 a.m., in Room K. |
GATT Library | zb111kq4701 | Sub-Committee D (Articles 40 to 43) of Committee III | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 23, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 23/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/D/1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A-E | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zb111kq4701 | zb111kq4701_90190357.xml | GATT_155 | 148 | 1,169 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C .3/D/1
ON DU 23 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE D (ARTICLES 40 to 43) OF COMMITTEE III
At the 17th meeting of the Third Committee, 22 December 1947, the
Chairman, with the approval of the Committee, appointed Sub-Committee D
to consider and make recommendations upon Articles 40 to 43 and the
amendments submitted to these Articles, excepting the amendments to
Article 42 affecting the question of preferences, which have been referred
to the joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III. and the Swiss proposal
for a new provision relating to Article 21, which has been referred to
Committee III.b.
The representatives of the following delegations were appointed to be
members of Sub-Committee D: Argentina, Belgium, Colombia, Denmark, France,
Iraq, Italy, Peru, Southern Rhodesia, United Kingdom, United States of America. |
GATT Library | qz177cy5622 | Sub-Committee E (Articles 20 and 22) | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 31, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 31/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/E/1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A-E | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/qz177cy5622 | qz177cy5622_90190364.xml | GATT_155 | 105 | 896 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
UNRESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3 /E/1
31 December 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERICAL POLICY
SUB- COMMITTEE E (ARTICLES 20 AND 22)
Committee III has appointed a Sub-Committee with the following
terms of reference and membership:
Terms of Reference
To examine, and submit recommendations to Committee III
concerning, the proposals on Articles 20 and 22, with
authority to consult, if considered necessary, with the
Sub-Committee of Committee II on Articles 13 and 14.
Membership
Ceylon Netherlands
Chile New Zealand
China Peru
Colombia South Africa
Egypt Sweden
France United Kingdom
Ireland United States
Mexico |
GATT Library | jx322kf8974 | Sub-Committee I. Draft Agenda prepared by the Secretariat for the First Meeting. : To be held 6 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 5, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 05/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/1, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/jx322kf8974 | jx322kf8974_90200001.xml | GATT_155 | 0 | 0 | |
GATT Library | rv380bm4929 | Sub-Committee I. Draft Agenda prepared by the Secretariat for the First Meeting. : To be held 6 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 5, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 05/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/1, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/rv380bm4929 | rv380bm4929_90200001.xml | GATT_155 | 400 | 2,802 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.4/A/1
ON DU 5 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FOURTH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE I
DRAFT AGENDA PREPARED BY THE SECRETARIAT FOR THE FIRST MEETING
To be Held 6 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
1. Election of Sub-Committee's Chairman.
2. Decision in respect to Sub-Comittee's records.
3. Consideration of the amendments aiming to the exclusion of public
enterprises from the dispositions of Chapter V. These amendments
consist of the six following indicated under number 2, 6, 8, 9,
10 and 14 of the Preliminary Annotated Agenda (E/CONF.2/C.4/1).
Deletion of the words [whether engaged in by private or
public commercial enterprise] in paragraph 1 Article 44 (number 2
of the Preliminary Annotated Agenda) and in paragraph 1 Article 45
(number 9 of the Preliminary Annotated Agenda).
Deletion of the words [or public] in the sub-paragraph (b)
paragraph 2, Article 44 numberr 6 of the Preliminary Annotated Agenda).
Deletion of the words [between public commercial enterprises,
or between private and public commercial enterprises] at the end
of sub-paragraph (b), paragraph 2, Article 44 (number 6 of the
Preliminary Annotated Agenda).
Deletion of paragraph 4 in Article 44 (number 8 of the
Preliminary Annotated Agenda).
Deletion of the last part of paragraph 2 Article 45 [provided
that in tho case of a complaint against a single public commercial
enterprise acting independently, such complaint may be presented
only by a Member on its own behelf and only after the Member has
resorted, to the procedure under paragraph 1 of this Article].
(Number 10 of the Preliminary Annotated Agenda).
Deletion of the words [private and public in paragraph 1
Article 47 (number 14 of the Preliminary Annotated Agenda).
4. Consideration of the amendment proposed by the delegation of Ecuador
for an exception in favour of "governmental measures taken by a Member
/in respect of E/CONF.2/C.4/.A/1
Page 2
in respect of basic foodstuffs when such measures are intended to
counter speculation and consequently are transitional in character
and provided, that they are communicated to the Organization in due
time". (Number 3 of the Preliminary Annotated Agenda).
5. Consideration of the proposition made by the delegation of Ecuador for
an exception In relation to monopolies in the production, processing
and sale of common salt tobacco, alcohol and liquor established by
Members as a source of revenue". (Number 4 of the Preliminary
Annotated Agenda). |
GATT Library | bv849nf0810 | Sub-Committee I. Draft agenda prepared by the Secretariat for the Second Meeting. : To be held 8 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 8, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 08/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/A/2, E/CONF. 2/C. 4/A/1-21, C. 4/A/W/1-9, and C. 4/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bv849nf0810 | bv849nf0810_90200002.xml | GATT_155 | 474 | 3,454 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C. 4/A/2
DU 8 December 1947
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FOURTH COMMITTEE: RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
SUB-COMMITTEE 1
DRAFT AGENDA PREPARED BY THE SECRETARIAT FOR THE SECOND MEETING
To be held 8 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
CONSIDERATION OF THE AMENDMENTS CONCERNING THE FUNCTIONS OF THE
ORGANIZATION IN RELATION TO RESTRICTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES
Article 44, Paragraph 1
1. The delegation of Argentina proposes the deletion of the following
words:
[individually or through the organization or in both ways]
(Number 2 of E/CONF.2/C.4/1).
Paragraph 2
2. The delegation of Argentina proposes that the word "Investigation" bi
substituted for, the word. "decide".
(Number 5 of E/CONF.2/C.4/1).
3. The delegation of Italy proposes that the word "establish" be
substituted for the word "decide".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.2).
4. The delegation of Mexico proposes that the words "it may be decided"
be substituted for the words "the Organization may decide".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.5).
Article 45, Paragraph 4
5. The delegation of Mexico proposes that the words "shall form an
opinion as to" be substituted for the words "shall decide".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.5);
Paragraph 5
6. The delegation of Mexico proposes that the word "if, in accordance
with foregoing paragraph, it is considered" be substituted for the words
"if the Organization decides".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.5).
Paragraph 6
7. The delegation of Italy proposes that the word 'establish" be
substituted for the word "decide".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.2).
/8. The delegation E/CONF.2/C.4/A/2
Page 2
8. The delegation of Mexico proposes that the words "make recommendations
based on the opinions presented by the members reforred to in paragraph 1
as to" be substituted for the word "decide".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add. 5).
Paragraph 7
9. The delegation of Argentina proposes that the words "the result of the
investigation made" be substituted for tho words "its decisions and the
reasons therefore".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1).
10. The delegation of Italy proposes that the word "establishment" be
substituted for the word "decision".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.2).
11. The delegation of Mexico proposes that the words "the recommendations
referred to in the previous paragraph" be substituted for the words "its
decision".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.5).
Paragraph 8
12. The delegation of Argentina proposes that the word considerr" be
substituted for the word "decides".
(E/CONF.2/11/Add.3).
13. The delegation of Italy proposes that (a) the word "establish" be
substituted for the word "decides"; (b) the word "recommend" be
substituted for the word "request".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.2).
14. The delegation of Mexico proposes that the sentence "if it is found"
be substituted for the sentence "if the organizations decides".
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.5).
Paragraph 9
15. The delegation of Italy proposes the elimination of this paragraph.
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.2).
Paragraph 10
16. The delegation of Italy proposes the deletion of this paragraph.
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.2).
Article 47, Paragraph 4
17. The delegation ot Italy proposes the deletion of the word. "decision.
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.2).
Article 48
18. The delegation of Mexico proposes that this Article be deleted entirely.
(E/CONF.2/C.4/1/Add.5). |
GATT Library | xz987gt2583 | Sub-Committee on Article 75 (Composition of the Executive Baord). Summary record of the Seventh Meeting. : Held 29 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 30, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 30/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.12 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xz987gt2583 | xz987gt2583_90200116.xml | GATT_155 | 958 | 6,444 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C .6/W.12
30 December 1947
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL : ENGLISH
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 75 (COMPOSITION OF THE EXECUTIVE BAORD)
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE SEVENTH MEETING
Held 29 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. JABBARA (Syria)
The Sub-Committee considered paragraph 2 of the United States draft.
Mr. GAZDER (Pakistan) thought that alternative sub-paragraph (b)
was to be preferred to alternative sub-paragraphs (b) and (c).
Mr. MONDELLO (Italy) said that in sub-pararaph (a) he would prefer
"Members of chief economic importance" to "Members of chief importance
in international trade". He also preferred alternative sub-paragraph (b)
and suggested that the word "desirability" should be retained instead of
changing it to "necessity" as had been proposed.
Mr. KOJEVE (France) said that if the proposal of the delegation of
France were accepted, he would suggest that the paragraph regarding criteria
should read".... shall include Members of chief importance in international
trade representative of (a) the diverse types of economy existing within
the membership of the Organization, and (b) the major geographic areas of
the world ".
Mr. KARMAKAR (India) stressed the desirability of ensuring that the
criteria contained in sub-paracraphs (b) and (c) should be given a definite
degree of representation. He therefore suggested that paragraph 5 might
be amended to contain a reference to the allocation of seats on the Board.
Mr. WUNZ-KING (China) suggested that pragraph 2 might read as
follows:
"2. In selecting the members of the Executive Board the Conference
shall have regard to the necessity and desirability of ensuring that
the Board is composed of Members of chief economic importance and of
countries of smaller economic importance representative of
(a) the diverse types of economy existing within the
Organization and the countries of varying stages of
development, and
/ (b) the major E/CONF.2/C.6/W.12 Page 2
(b) the major geographic areas of the world.
In determining the degree of economic importance account shall be
taken of the factors of population, external trade and national
income."
Mr. MACHADO (Cuba) said that he would accept sub-paragraph (a) but
was firmly of the opinion that this criterion must be confined to extent of
international trade alone. He favoured the alternative sub-pararaph (b).
He did not think a definite number of states should be specified to satisfy
the criteria contained in sub-paragraphs (b) and (c).
Mr. TANGE (Australia) pointed out that his delegation did not oppose
the establishment of criteria provided that means could be found to ensure
that each criterion was given due representation and a solution was found
for the problem of marginal cases. He preferred alternative sub-paragraphs
(b) and (c). It would be most difficult on the basis of statistics to
specify the eight Members of chief importance in international trade. He
thought that the list of such Members should be confined to the states
whose international trade clearly exceeded that of other states. That was
the essence of the Australian draft which he had just circulated and which
avoided specifying a number of countries of chief importance in
international trade. There would be no necessity then to solve the proolem
of marginal cases. Paragraph 3 of the Australian draft visualized
machinery of the type of a Nominations Comittee,
Mr. STINEBOWER (United States) said that the factors of population
and national income were of minor importance as regards the Organization.
The criterion of major importance was that of degreee of international trade.
However, the criterion must be administered flexibly so that, for example,
account could be taken of the peculiar position of China. His delegation
would be in favour of arbitrarily giving China a seat upon the Board for
the first few years. A system for constitution the Board such as that set
out in the United States draft had worked effectively in the case of the
International Labour Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organiiation.
Not to mention the number of states of chief importance in international
trade, as had been suggested by the delegate of Austriia, would lead to
confusion. The figure of eight was not arbitrary but represented
approximately one-half the Board.
Mr. TUNGE (Australia), replying to the delegate of the United States,
said that his delegation had previously objected to the establishment of
criteria because it had not been proposed to establish any machinery which
/would enable E/CONF.2/C.6/W.12
Page 3
would enable such criteria to influence the effections to the Board. The
Australian draft aimed at creating such machinery.
Mr. DAO (China) thanked the delegate of the United States for his
understanding of the special position of China. He pointed out that the
Charter dealt with subjects reaching far beyond international trade and
therefore his delegation preferred the criterion of "chief economic
importance".
Mr. MONDELLO (Italy) agreed with the delegate of China and suggested
that sub-paragraph (a) should read "Members of chief economic importance
having particular regard to international trade".
Mr. ALAYZA (Peru) reminded delegates of the principle ho had mentioned
at a previous meeting, namely, that states of chief economic importance
should be given seats upon the Board if they satisfied the two primary
criteria of representation of diverse types of economy and representation
of major geographic areas.
Mr. MACHADO (Cuba), relying to the delegate of China, said that
although the Charter dealt with subjects reaching beyond international trade,
it only dealt with such subjects insofar as they related to international
trade. Countries which failed to be elected under sub-paragraph (a) could
always be elected under sub-paragraphs (b) and (c).
Mr. KARMAKAR (India) thought that factors other than extent of
international trade should be considered. Population must be taken into
account for countries with large populations such as India had great
potential. development and power of consumption. |
GATT Library | nq098zj1952 | Sub-Committee on Article 75 (Composition of the Executive Board) | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 19, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 19/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.1 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/nq098zj1952 | nq098zj1952_90200102.xml | GATT_155 | 653 | 4,232 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C.6/W.1
19 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 75 (COMPOSITION OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD)
Synopsis of Alternatives A, B and C Prepared by the
Preparatory Committee and of the Amendments
Presented thereto and the Proposals of the
Delegations of Czechoslovakia and France
A. Size of the Board
1. Basic Figures
(a) Alternative A, the proposals of the delegations of Czecholovakia
and France and the amendment of the delegation of Chile to Alternative B
provide for eighteen members.
(b) Alternative C provides for seventeen members.
(c) Alternative B provides for a maximum of fifteen members.
(a) The amendment of the delegation of Cuba to Alternative B provides
for a minimum of fifteen and a maximum of eighteen members.
2. Provisions regarding Variations of, Basic Figures
(a) Paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of Alternative A and paragraph 6 of
Alternative C provide for automatic reduction in the size of the Board
in certain circumstances.
(b). Paragraph 7: of Alternative A and paragraph 2 of Alternative B
empowre the Conference, upon the recommendation- of the Board and by a
two-thirds majority of the votes cast, to increase the size of the
Board.
B. Method of Congtitution of the Board
This problem can probably best be analyzed by a series of questions, the
answer -to each of which enables the next question to be attacked. These
questions are:
Question 1
Should a number of states be designated in the Charter as entitled
to seats on the Board? -
(a) Alternative A gives seats on the Board to eight states:
Canada, China, France, India, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,
United Kingdom, United States of America and either Belgium and
/the Netherlands E/CONF.2/C.6/W.1
Page 2
the Netherlands alternating every three years or the Customs
Union of Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands should these
States desire to be represented as a unit.
(b) The proposal of the delegation of France adds two states to
this number - Argentina and Brazil.
(c) Paragraph 9 of Alternative A charges the Conference with
reviewing the list or states entitled to permanent seats every
three years and enables the Conference to amend the list by a
simple majority vote. The delegation of Mexico proposes that
this majority be amended to one of two-thirds of the Members
present and voting.
Question 2
If the answer to Question 1 is negative, should states of chief
economic importance be entitled to seats under the Charter?
Alternative C provides that the eight states of chief economic
importance as determined every three years by the Conference by a
two-thirds majority vote shall be entitled to seats on the Board.
Question 3
(a) If the answer to Question 2 is negative, by what method
should the Board be constituted?
or
(b) If the answer to either Questions 1 or 2 is positive, by
what method should the remainder of the Board be constituted?
(j) Alternatives B and C and the proposals of the delegations
of France and Czechoslovakia provide for election by the,
Conference by a two-thirds majority vote. Alternative B
also provides that seven (out of fifteen) members shall
be eligible for immediate re-election. The delegation
of Cuba suggests that one half of the members might
be eligible for immediate re-election.
(:i) Alternative A, in paragraph l (b), (c) and (d), provides
for representation of different regions and economies.
This is contemplated also by paragraph 4 of the proposal
of the delegation of Czechoslovakia and by the amendment
to paragraph 1 of Alternative B by the delegation of Cuba.
C. Other Major Questions
1. All the alternatives and proposals made contemplate elected members
holding office for three years and provide for a system of rotation.
2. Alternatives A and C and the proposal of the delegation of France refer
to the matter of the representation of customs unions. |
GATT Library | hz242xk0115 | Sub-Committee on Article 75 (Composition of the Executive Board) : Proposal by the Delegation of Australia for Consideration by the Sub-Committee | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 30, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 30/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.11 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hz242xk0115 | hz242xk0115_90200115.xml | GATT_155 | 311 | 2,090 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W.11
ON DU 30 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
ORIGINAL : ENGLISH
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 75 (COMPOSITION OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD)
Proposal by the Delegation of Australia for Consideration
by the Sub-Committee
Article 75
Executive Board
1. The Executive Board shall consist of the representatives of 18 Members
of the Organization elected by the Confererce. A customs union as defined
in paragraph 4 of Article 42 shall be eligible for a seat on the
Executive Board, if all of its members are Members of the Organization and
if its members desire to be represented as a unit.
2. In electing the members of the Executive Board the Conference shah
provide:
(a) reasonable representation of the diverse types of economy and
of the major geographic areas existing within the membership of
the Organization;
(b) membership for Members or Customs Unions which have the largest
external trade, the number of such members elected being determined
by the Conference in the light of the requirements of paragraph 2 (a).
3. The Conference shall arrange to receive a report and recommendations
on the implementation of paragraph 2 and shall regularly establish on a
comparative basis the size of the external trade of each of the Members of
the Organization and of customs unions composed wholly of Members.
4. The members of the Board shall be elected, and the determinations
required by this Article shall be made by a two-thirds majority of Members
present and voting. If on two consecutive ballots no Member is elected
the remainder of the election shall be by a majority of the Members of
the Conference present and voting.
5. The term of membership of the Board shall be three years unless the
Conference determines otherwise. A retiring member shall be eligible for
immediate re-election. |
GATT Library | bc757vk8764 | Sub-Committee on Article 75 (Composition of the Executive Board). Summary record of Fifth Meeting. : Held 26 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 27, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 27/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.9 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bc757vk8764 | bc757vk8764_90200112.xml | GATT_155 | 893 | 5,586 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C .6/W.9
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 27 December 1947
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT . COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SIXTHCOMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 75 (COMPOSITION OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD)
SUMMARY RECORD OF FIFTH MEETING
Held 26 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. JABBARA (Syria)
Mr. ALYZA (Peru) said that the principle of free election must serve.
as a basis of discussion. This being so, the sub-conmmittee needed to define
the criteria for the election. He broadly agreed with the criteria contained
in paragraph 2 of the United States draft (document E/CONF.2/C.6/W.5). Of
these criteria (b) and (c) must be preponderate. However this paragraph was
too vague. The criterion of chief economic importance must fall within the
other criteria and should not stand alone. He questioned whether under
paragraph 3 there woùld be a free election or an election on the basis of a
previously established statistical list. He could not support an election
of the latter type.
Mr. STINEBOWER (United States) explained that his draft was an effort
to put into formal language the remarks ha had made before. The election
under paragraph 3 would be something between a free election and the
rubberstamping of a previously prepared. list. It would not be a free
election in the sense that Members would not have to exercise some sense of
responsibility. The matter depended upon the rules to be established under
paragraph 5. The annex referred to in paragraph 4 would contain the Members
to be elected at the first election. The second sentence of that paragraph
should be in square brackets.
The Sub-committee proceeded to examine the United States draft in an
effort to ascertain whether it could be used as a basis or discussion.
Mr. COIBAN (Norway) considered that the United States draft migt be
taken as a basis or discussion, although he had several drafting amendments
to offer to it. He also thought that paragraph 3 (a) should. not be limited
to any number of states.
Mr. KARMARKAR (India) thouht- that the United States draft might serve
as a basis of compromise. He agreed with the the criteria mentioned but
pointed out that the draft postponed for a later conference the problem of
/how to give E/CONF.2/C.6/W.9
Page 2
how to give due regard to the three criteria. He disagreed with the delegate
of Norway that the number of states of chief importance in international
trade should not be specified.
Mr. FAYAT (Balgium) said that no member of the Benelux Customs Union
would object to paragraph 1of the United States draft. He preferred the
first -of the two alternatives set out in paragraph 2, He thought that
paragraph 3 (a) went a long way to satisfy the point of view of those who
do not wish to see permanent seats on the Board established, He agreed
that the\states of chief economic importance in international trade for the
first election might be mentioned in the annex referred to in paragraph 4.
Mr. COOMBS (Australia) thought it was neither necessary nor desirable
to write into the Charter principles to guide elections to the Board and in
any case he did not think that this would be an effective way of achieving
the desired objective. There was no merit in laying down principles unless
the method of election later approved took them all into account. However,:
the method of election specified in the United States draft only took the
first principle into account.
The essence of the United States proposal was contained in paragraph
3 (a). He questioned. why the eight states of chief importance in
international trade should be established by a vote, There was no difficulty
after studying statistics to determine the first two states in this number
of eight. However, it would be extremely difficult to establish the remaining
six states on the basis ofobjective statistics. In that case he doubted.
whether such statistics would form the sole basis for the election.
Mr. VUNSZ-KING (China) thought that the United States draftt was generally
acceptable, The factors ofpopulation, external trade and national income
should be teen into account in assessing the states of chief importance in
international trade. It would be necessary to give due representative in
this category for the varicus stages of economic development. He thought
that if the phrase "chief importance in international trade" was objectionable
wording similar to that used for the Security Council in the Charter of the
United Nations might be employed.
Mr. MONDELLO (Italy) thought that the United States draft might be
taken as a basis for discussion but he was opposed to paragraph 3 (a).
M. .KOJEVE (France) disagreed with the statement of the delegate of
Australia that it was not necessary to set out principles to guide the
elections to the Board. He considered that a strict fomula should not be
used but that certain prinçiples must be laid down in order to enable the
Conference to decide borderline cases and to increase confidence in the
/Organization. E/CONF .2/C .6/W.9
Page 3
Organization. He thought that it was more important to ensure the general
daversity of the Board than the representatimn of state of chief economic
importance. He agreed with the delegate of Belgium that the annex mentioned
in paragraph 4 might contain a list of states to be elected possibly to
serve as a model. |
GATT Library | jy761dq2312 | Sub-Committee on Article 75 (Composition of the Executive Board). Summary record of the Sixth Meeting. : Held on 27 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 29, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 29/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.10 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/jy761dq2312 | jy761dq2312_90200114.xml | GATT_155 | 557 | 3,616 | RESTRICTED
United Nations Nations Unies E/CONF.2/C.6/W.1O
29 December 1947
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 75 (COMPOSITION OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD)
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE SIXTH MEETING
Held on 27 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Mr. SCARAPATI (Argentina) reiterated the support he had given in the
Sixth Committee for Alternative B. The delegate of Australia had shown
the difficulty of establishing criteria for membership of the Board. Such
criteria in any case should not be limited to chief Importance in
international trade. He had no objection to taking the United States draft
as a basis of discussion but he opposed paragraph 3 (a) of that draft as it
did not give to the criterion of representation of diverse types of economy
the primary importance which it should. have.
Mr. GAZDER (Pakistan) thought that paragraph 2 of the United States
draft should. be generally acceptable. He agreed it would be difficult to
establish criteria and to ascertain the eight states of chief importance
in international trade. Any criteria must be precise and must ensure the
continuity, stability and impartiality of the Board.
Mr. HOLMES (United KIngdom) found the United. States draft generally
acceptable. He thought that it would make for the efficiency and stability
of the Board. The fact that it would. be difficult to establish criteria
was no reason why an attempt should not be made to do 80. Were no criteria
for mebership of the Board. established, he feared that election to membership
would depend upon political, considerations.
Mr. VANER (Turkey) agreed that the United States draft should. be taken
as a basis of discussion.
Mr. PARAPAGUA (Brazil) considered the United States draft a step forward.
because it showed, the three classes of states which should be represented
on the Board.. The Executive Board was the soul of the Orgnization and
therefore must be truly representative. He thought that the United States
draft should be brought to its logical conclusion by dividing the members
of the Board into three lots of six members each.
Mr. COUILLARD (Canada) found the United States draft to be a good basis
' discussion. It effaced the presumption of permanent seats, which some
delegates opposed and it established clearly the sovereigity of the Conference
/as well as E/CONF.2/C.6/W.10
Page 2
as well as ensuring that the Board was truly representative.
Mr. COLBAN (Norway), referring to the statement of the delegate of
Brazil that the Executive Board vas the soul of the Organization, remarked
that the Board, although performing the daily work of the Organization, was
subject to the Conference,
The Sub-Committee agreed to take the United. States draft t as a basis
no dliscussion and to examine it paragraph by paragraph. It was also agreed
that at the end of this examination a small drafting group might be
established.
Paragraph 1
Discussion centred around the second sentence. Three principal points
arose:
(a) It vas agreed that the words "shall be eligible" did not mean
that a customs union was entitled as a right to a seat upon the Bard.
(b) one delegate suggested that the sector sentence should be included
in a subsequent paragraph and not in the first paragraph.
(c) It vas suggested that the word "states" in the last line of
paragraph 1 should be ommitted. |
GATT Library | gj596gx3720 | Sub-Committee on Article 75 (Composition of the Executive Board). Summary record of the Third Meeting. : Held on 20 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 22, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 22/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.4 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gj596gx3720 | gj596gx3720_90200105.xml | GATT_155 | 837 | 5,413 | RESTRICTED
United Nations Nations Unies É/CONF.2/C.6/W. 4
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 22 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 75 (COMPOSITION OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD)
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE THIRD MEETING
Held on 20 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. JABBARA (Syria)
The Sub-Committee discussed the method of constituting the Executive
Board.
Mr. KOJEVE (France) explained that the proposal made by the delegation of
France and included ini the annotated draft agenda meant that the Foard would
consist of eighteen members all of which would be elected by the Canference.
Certain statea to be agreed upon at the present Conferencs, whose names would.
be inserted in the Charter, would, ipso facto, be elected by a simple majority
vote; the remaining members of the Board should be elected by a two-thirds
majority vote.
Mr. COIRAN (Norway) emphasized that delegates were not fighting over
the issue whether there should be permanent seats on the Board or not, but
they- were endeavouring to find a formula ensuring that the great economic powers
as well as other relevant interests should be given their due representation.
Mr. MACHADO (Cuba) strongly supported alternative B which embodied
the principle of the free election by the Conference of all members of the
Board.
Mr. STINEBOWER (United States) said that his delegation was not so mach
intersted in having a number of permanent seats upon the Board as it was in
seeing that criteria were established for membership, and that these criteria
were satisfied in practice. Alternative B did not lay dawn any such criteria.
He attached great importance to one of the criteria specified, in alternative C,
namely, that of chief economic importance. He also agreed that other
criteria should include adequate geographical representation as well as the
representation of diverse types of economy.
After establishing the above criteria the question arose as to what kind.
of weight should be attached to each of them. He thought that giving eight
seats out of a total membership of eighteen to states of chief economic
importance, as proposed in alternative C, was not to pay undue regard to
the first criterion he bad mentioned. It was true that the appeared to compose
/almost E/CONF.2/C .6/W.4
Page 2
almost one half of the Board as a result of this criterion but the criteria
overlapped.
It. had been suggested that it would be better to have all members of the
Board elected by the Conference. He had no objection to the principle of
electing all members but alternative C, by specifying that the states of
chief economic importance would be determined by the Conference every three
years, went very close to a process of election.
He criticized the proposal of the delegation of France on the ground that
it did not lay down any criteria as the basis for appointment to the Board.
Mr. KOJEVE (France) appreciated the need for continuity in the operations
of the Board but he thought there were certain dangers in the methods of
ensuring continuity. The proposal of the delegation of France was therefore
flexible. It was difficult to define the criteria mentioned by the delegate
off the United States. The list of countries specified in the French proposal
did, however, take account of certain principles enunciated, at the Drafting
Committee of the Preparatory Committee and it could be discussed on the basis
of criteria the sub-committee established. He thought that the French proposal
satisfied all the considerations which had been advanced and he still
considered it to be the best solution.
Mr. GAZDER (Pakistan) said that the primary criterion to be observed was
that of volume of trade of the type which would help the economic development
of other countries.
Mr. COUILLARD (Canada) said that the Executive Board must be composed
in an equitable and wise manner. To be equitable it must be representative
and to be wise it mast be acceptable to all the Members of the Organization.
Representativeness rested firstly on the meeting of the legitimate interests
of the major economic powers and upon a combination of geographical
representation and representation of various sugages of economic C. -slopment.
The interests of the major economic powers could easily be satisfied., either
by designation in the Charter or by a formula, but any satisfactory formula
would be diffficult to obtain. However, whether the interests of the major
economic powers were satisfied by designation or by formula, "permanent" seats
would not be provided as the Charter could always be amended. It would not
be so easy to give due allowance for geographical representation and
representation for the various stages of economic development. However, the
Food and Agriculture Organization had solved this problem.
It must be remembered that the Organization would be a functional one
and the relation between the Conference and the Executive Board must be
always borne in mind. Now that the question of weighted voting was provisionally
and tentatively solved, 'the Conference would be clearly the sovereign body of
the Organization. |
GATT Library | nf582kk5547 | Sub-Committee on Article 75 (Composition of the Executive Board).Summary record of the Fourth Meeting. : Held 23 December at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 24, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 24/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.6 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/nf582kk5547 | nf582kk5547_90200109.xml | GATT_155 | 1,103 | 6,953 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.6/W.6
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 24 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 75 (COMPOSITION OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD)
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FOURTH MEETING
Held 23 December at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. JABBARA (Syria)
The sub-committee continued its discussion of the method of constitutlng
the Executive Board,
Mr. TANGE (Australia) said. that the sub-committee had yet to face up to
the practical problem of establishing the criteria for membership of the
Board. Whether these criteria were established or not in the Charter, certain
criteria would always be borne in mind. by delegates at an election of members
of the Board. He did not think that there was any doubt that the United. States
would. always have a seat upon the Board irrespective of what criteria were
established, but if one vent further down the list of states which were to be
Given automatic seats It became very difficult to assets the merite of the
claims of competing: states. For example, he did. not see how a resultant could
be struck between the criteria of population and extent of trads.
He agreed with the delegate of the United States that if certain states
were given automatic seats by the Charter there must be provisions in the
Charter for reviewing the list and amending it. Therefore the criteria upon
which the list was established must also be written in to the text, but the
question Still remained whether it was possible to establish criteria.
Mr. HolMES (United Kingdom.) said. that his delegation would find great
difficulty ln accepting any solution which did not mention for the first
period. of the life of the Organization the criteria of chief economic
importance. The use of this criterion for this period would also have to be
regarded as a precedent. He thought that if states were designated in the
Charter as entitled te seats on the Board, the list of them should not be
immutable. but should only be changed for very strong reasons. A common
feature of Alternatives A, B and C was provision to ensure continuity and
the reason for this was the need to take full advantage of the membership
in the Organization of states of chief economic importance. This being the
case, there was no reason why this need. should not be recognized. by designating
/those states E/CONF.2/C.6/W.6
Page 2
those states in the Charter as entitled to seats on the Board. His delegation
considered that if there were not to be a system of weighted voting the
Executive Board must be so composed as to recognize the greater contribution
which certain states could make to the work of the Organization.
mr. KARMARKAR (India) thought that one of the criteria to be established
must be that of chief economic importance and. that the states satisfying
this criterion must have seats upon the Board., However, he thoughtt that
representation must also be allowed to other countries which had similar
types of economies and which were able to form one economic unit, as well as
representation of regions. Be suggested that eight seats be given to states
of chief economic importance, three seats to the states of Latin America,
one seat to the states of the Middle East, one seat to the remaining states
of the British Commonwealth and that the five remaining seats shoüid be _
filled. by simple election. Be felt that India should be considered. as one of -
the states of chief economic importance.
Mr. MONDELLO. (Italy) said. that he maintained hie preference for
Alternative B. If Alternative C were to be accepted, Italy would probably
find. herself. in the unfortunate position of being ninth upon the list of
states of. chief economic importance. Any scheme of geographical representation
must give due representation to the countries of the Mediterranean peninsula,
He thought that the only possible compromise would, be a combination of
Alternatives B and C.
Mr. WUNZ-KING (China) did not see why it would be difficult for the
sub-committee to establish. criteria for membership of the Board. :All
delegates seemed to agree that seats must be given to the states of chief
economic importance. The factors which must be considered in assessing
this importance were population, national income and foreign trade.. All
delegates also seemed to agree that the.Board. must represent different:
types of economies and regions. He would be in favour of any formula.
which would satisfy all other delegates.
Mr. VANER (Turkey) said that the main qualities. of the Organization';-
must be vitality and continuity. The main qualities of the Executive Board:-
must be representativeness and impartiality. To. be representative the:
Board musr give due representation to states of chief economic importance,
to different types of economies and to regions.. He therefore considered.
that the question .before the sub-committee. was essentially a technial one
and that lt was necessary. to be precise. The solution of :the delegate of,
France was too vague. .
.,Mr. .-FAYAT.(Belgium) said that the sub-committee generally agreed. that
criteria for membership. of the Board must be established. Most delegates
/also agreed E/CONF.2/C. 6/W 6
Page 3
also agreed that seats must be reserved for states of chief economic
importance. However, he thought that it would be difficult to find a formula
which would solve the problem of marginal cases. If it were not possible
to find such a formula, the sub-committee must fall back on the empirical
approach and list the states entitled to seats on the Board. This list
would guarantee prospective members continuity and stability in the
Organization. There would be no question of any state being entitled. to a
permanent seat as the Charter could always be amended. He thought that in
any such list due account must be taken of the existence of customs unions,
Mr. KOJEVE (France) Emphasized. that he was opposed to quantitative
criteria but not to qualitative criteria. He pointed out the dangers involved
in quantitative criteria. He had no objection to the insertion of criteria in
the proposal of his delegation to show the basis upon which the list of states
was drawn, up but he thought it would, be impossible to establish such criteria.
He agreed that continuity and stability were needed in the Board. He
suggested that the sub-committee should try and establish some objective
criteria. If it found it could. not do this, it should endeavour to draw up
a list of states entitled to seats on the Board. If agreement could not be
reached. upon this list, Alternative B should be taken as a basis for discussion. |
GATT Library | qm911gm3080 | Sub-Committee on Article 75. Summary record of the First Meeting. : Held at the Capitol Building at 10.30 a.m. 19 December 1947 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 20, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 20/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.2 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/qm911gm3080 | qm911gm3080_90200103.xml | GATT_155 | 284 | 1,978 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE
ON DU E/CONF.2/C.6/W.2
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 20 December 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 75
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST MEETING
Held at the Capitol Building at 10.30 a.m. 19 December 1947
Chairman: Mr. JABBARA (Syria)
The Sub-Committee discussed at length the method by which it
would go about its task.
Messrs. MACHADO (Cuba), FEDRANO (Argentina) and TANGE (Australia)
considered that Alternative B should be taken as a basis of discussion.
Messrs. WUNSZ-KING (China), VAHER' (Turkey), :H0LMES (United Kingdom),
FORTHOMME (Belgium) and STINEBOWER (United States) thought that no
particular alternative or proposal should be taken as a basis of
discussion but that a list of the issues to be decided should be
formulated and those issues decided one by one.
The CHAIRMAN proposed that discussion should be commenced on the
question of the size of the Executive Board and when this had been decided
the method of electing the Board should be considered. It vas agreed that
this procedure should be followed.
Mesers, PARANAGUA (Brazil) and KOJEVE (Frence) considered that the
Board should be composed of eighteen members.
Mr. MACHADO (Cuba) on a point of order stated that he considered
discussion should be focussed upon the three alternatives prepared by the
Preparatory Committee and the amendments thereto and proposal submitted
by delegations. Alternative B, as the one favoured by a majority of the
delegations in the Sirth Committee, should be given priority of
examination.
After further discussion it was agreed that the Sub-Committee should
work at its next meeting upon the basis of a synopsis of the various
alternatives, amendments and proposals to be prepared and circulated by
the Secretariat. |
GATT Library | yw597dw4565 | Sub-Committee on Article 75. Summary record of the Second Meeting. : Held 20 December 1947 at 10:30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 20, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 20/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.3 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/yw597dw4565 | yw597dw4565_90200104.xml | GATT_155 | 684 | 4,371 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.6/W.3
ON - DU 20 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 75
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE SECOND MEETING
Held 20 December 1947 at 10:30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. JABBARA (Syria)
The Sub-Committee discussed the size of the Executive Board.
Mr. COLBAN (Norway) said he thought that the maximum number of Members
of the Board should. be seventeen.
Mr. KDJEVE (France) supported. a maximum of seventeen and a minimum
of fifteen members as proposed by Cuba but had no objection to one figure
of seventeen as a maxmum. He pointed out that assessment of the correct
figure, however, depended upon the number of countries to be given permanent
seats if such a aystem were to be adopted.
Mr. MONDELLO (Italy) thought that the number of members should be
eighteer, while Mr. SCARPATI (Argentina) supported the Cuban proposal,
Mr. GAZDER (Pakistan) thought that the figure of fifteen would make
for effficiancy but he had no objection to a figure of eighteen. The
porportion of great powers upon the Board to other countries represented
should be one to three.
Mr. MACHADO (Cuba) explained that the Cuban proposal was based on the
principle of elasticity as the size of the Board depended upon a number of
factors which could not be decided at the Havana Conference.
Mr. PARANAGUA (Brazil) considered that if the Organization were to have
say, forty-five Members, a figure of eighteen was not exaggerated. He
quoted his experience in the International Mbnetary Fund in support of this
figure.
Mr. ALAYZA (Peru) thought that it was difficult to fix a f igure at
this stage but that the figure of eighteen might be adopted provisionally.
The Economic and Social Council was composed of eighteen members.
Mr. HOMES (United Kingdom) thought that it was difficult to set a
figure at this time as the functions of members of the Board were not known.
/He considered E/CONF.2/C.6/W.3
Page 2
He considered the Sub-Committee might agree provisionally that some figure
would be selected final in the range fifteen to twenty
Mr. STINEBOWER (United States) agreed that it was difficult to fix
a figure when it was not clear just how the Board would operate. However,
it must be possible to set some limits which, if exceeded, might impair
efficiency. These limits he thought were fifteen and eighteen. Experience
Showed that a sliding scale as proposed by Cuba was a little use in practice.
Whatever figure was fixed, it could always be amended Under Article 95.
Mr. WUNSZ-KING (China) said that whatever figure was chosen, it should
not be such as might make the Board appear an inner circle. If there were
to be sixty Members of the Organization a Board of twenty was reasonable.
He suggested. the Cuban proposal be adopted provisionally.
Mr. TANGE (Australia) suggested the figure of eighteen be accepted
subject to review in the light of future discussion. Article 95 enabled
this figure to be amended later if necessary. He preferred a single figure
to be set rather than a sliding scale.
Mr. VANER (Turkey) pointed out the five factors which should be
considered in assessing the size of the Board. Only one of these factors
was known at the present time. Any figure selected must therefore be
arbitrary in some degree. Experience showed a maximum of eighteen was
desirable. .
Mr. COUILARD. (Canada) said that it was necessary to make the Board
such a size as would be both efficient and representative. His delegation
had therefore moved from the figure of fifteen which it had favoured in the
Preparatory Committee towards the figures of seventeen, although it would not
object to the figure of eighteen.
Mr. KARMARKAR (India) thought that the figure of eighteen was neither,
too large nor too small and it would enable all relevant interests to be
represented. . . - -.
Mr. FAYAT (Belgium) proposed that the figure of eighteen be accepted
provisionally. ;
The CEAIRMAN declared that the general feeling of the Sub-Committee
was that the figure of eighteen should be accepted provisionally. |
GATT Library | pq339gk6004 | Sub-Committee on Article 81 (The Tariff Committee). Summary record of the First Meeting. : Held on, 23 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 24, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 24/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.8 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/pq339gk6004 | pq339gk6004_90200111.xml | GATT_155 | 1,187 | 7,403 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.6/W.8
ON DU 24 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 81 (THE TARIFF COMMITTEE)
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST MEETING
Held on, 23 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. MACHADO (Cuba)
The CHAIRMAN asked whether the Sub-Committee might not confine its work
to paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 81 as it seemed that paragraphs 3, 4 and 5
had been adopted on first reading by the Sixth Committee.
Mr. DAO (China) thought that the Sub-Committee might have to consider
paragraph 5 as it might be necessary to insert in that paragraph provisions
regarding appeal from the decisions of the Tariff Committee and the attendance
of a non-member of the Tariff Committee at a meeting of the Committee which
was to discuss a matter of interest to that non-member.
The CHAIRMAN asked Mr. Dao to present a written proposal to the
Sub-Committee.
After some discussion it was agreed that the Sub-Committee would, in
addition to paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 81, consider the text of paragraph 4.
discussion of Paragpraph 1
Consideration of the meaning of the phrase "on behalf of" led to a
discussion of the question of the autonomy of the Tariff Committee within
the Organization.
Mr. AMADOR (Mexico) explained that the purpose of the amendment of
the delegation of Mexico to Article 74 was to make the Tariff Committee
subordinate to the Conference.
Mr. COUILLARD (Canada) said that the fears of small countries that by
confining membership in the Tariff Committee to states which had concluded
negotiations under Article 17 they would be prevented from participating in
the Organization were groundless.
Mr. KOJEVE (France) pointed out that the use of the phrase "on behalf of"
lacked sense and he suggested that those words should be suppressed.
Mr. AMADOR (Mexico) agreed with Mr. Kojeve's suggestion and went on
to propose that the phrase "subject to the provisions of Article 81" in
Article 74 should also be deleted. By these two deletions it would become
/very clear E/CONF. 2/C . 6/W. 8
Page 2
very clear that the Tariff Committee was subordinate to the Conference.
Mr. STINEBOWER (United States) emphasized that the Organization was not
to be a goodwill mission occupied in merely passing resolutions but it was
to be an organization tied to action. The question before the Sub-Committee
was not one of two international organizations -- The Trade Organization and
the Tarïff Committee -- but was one of two steps in a process towards
obtaining the benefits of the Charter. One stop in this process was acceptance
of the Charter; the other was the negotiations under Article 17, the conclusion
of which gave automatic membership in the Tariff Committee. In connection with
the second stop it was correct that the necessary determinations should be made
only by Members which had carried out the negotiations themselves. At the
appropriate time when membership of the Tariff Committee coincided with
membership of the Organization, his delegation would consider merging the
two bodies.
It must be remembered that the Conference acted in two capacities,
firstly, a policy-making capacity under Article 74, and secondly, a judicial
capacity under Article 89 and 90. Should actions arising out of decisions of
the Tariff Committee nullify benefits under the Charter received by any Member,
that Member might complain of the injury done to it under Article 89 and 90.
This being the case, his delegation could not accept any weakening of the
autonomy of the Tariff Committee as set out in Article 81.
Mr. BENDA (Czechoslovakia) thought that Articles 89 and 90 did not
entirely allow for appeal from decisions of the Tariff Committee. He thought
that right of appeal must be allowed in the Charter but it must be restricted
to cases of denial of benefits and the Conference should decide these cases
by a simple majority of the Members present and voting.
Mr. ROUCHDY (Egypt) thought that there should be a right of appeal from
the decisions of the Tariff Committee. He also thought that the proposal of
the delegation of China regarding the interim nature of the Tariff Committee
was sound.
Mr. PARANAGUA (Brazil) said that there was nothing unusual in certain
functions being given exclusively to one institution. He thought that the
present text of paragraph 1 should be maintained but that the amendment of
the delegation of Italy should be incorporated in Article 90 or 91 by stating
there that the decisions of the Tariff Committee should be subject to appeal
to the International Court of Justice.
The Sub-Committee agreed, conditionally upon the drafting of Article 17
by the Third Committee, to delete the words "on behalf of the Organization",
It was also agreed that the Chairman should inform the Chairman of the
Third Committee of the work being done by the Sub-Committee and consult with
him. The Sub-Committee then went on to agree that the Tariff Committee should
/have the power E/CONF.2/C 6/W.8
Page 3
have the power of initiating the negotiations provided for under Article 17
and to make recommendations pursuant to that Article.
The amendment of the delegation of Peru to delete the words "and
determinations was then discussed.
Mr. ALAYZA (Peru) said that his delegation considered that the Tariff
Committee should not be autonomous and should not have the power to take
the drastic action envisaged in paragraph 2 of Article 17. The Tariff
Committee's powers should be limited to promoting negotiations under Article 17
and also, in well defined cases, to investigating and reporting to the
Executive Board. On the basis of such reports the Board could assess damage
done and decide upon remedial action to be taken. The whole procedure of
investigation by the Committee and decision by the Board should also be open
to review.
Mr. PARANAGUA (Brazil) considered that the Tariff Committee must have
greater powers than those envisaged by the delegation of Peru. The Committee
must be able to enforce its findings by saktions.
Mr. ALAYZA (Peru) indicated that he would be prepared to withdraw his
amendment if it were agreed that the decisions of the Tariff Committee were
not to be final.
The Sub-Committee agreed that the amendment of the delegation of Peru
should be stood over pending the decision of the Third Committee upon the
text of Article 17. The Sub-Committee then considered the proposal of the
delegation of China to make the Tariff Committee an "Interim Tariff Cammittee"
as proposed at the First Session of the Preparatory Committee.
Mr. AMADOR (Mexico) pointed out that if the Tariff Committee were to
desappear, an extra burden would be placed upon the Conference.
Mr. DAO (China), replying to Mr. Amador, said that the Conference could
assign functions to the Executive Board and that the rules of procedure of
the Conference in any case might enable it to carry on its work although it
was not in session.
It was agreed that the proposal of the delegation of China, so far as it
related to paragraph 1, should be stood over until the text of paragraph 2 was
discussed. |
GATT Library | bj052sd1292 | Sub-Committee on Article 81 (The Tariff Committee). Summary record of the Second Meeting. : Held 30 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 30, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 30/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.13 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bj052sd1292 | bj052sd1292_90200117.xml | GATT_155 | 707 | 4,606 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C .6/W.13
ON DU 30 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 81 (THE TARIFF COMMITTEE)
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE SECOND MEETING
Held 30 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. MACHADO (Cuba)
Mr. BENDA (Czechoslovakia) said that several important problems arose
in connection with paragraph 2 of Article 17 which was bound up with Article 81.
The first problems concerned the membership of the Tariff Committee. It was
possible that a Member had negotiated mutually advantageous tariff concessions
with certain other Members before joinig the Organization. Would this
Member, before being entitled to membership of the Tariff Committee, be
required to re-negotiate these concessions. The second problem was concerned
with the jurisdiction of the Tariff Committee. If one Member failed. to
conclude negotiations with another Member under Article 17, the Tariff
Committee might authorize the second Member to withhold, certain benefits
from the first Member. However, the first Member would still be bound by the
provisions of the Charter to extend benefits to the second. Member although
receiving nothing in return. Although this situation was unfair, nothing
could be dons. It seemed only just that there should be a provision for
appeal from the decisions of the Tariff Committee to the Conference in such
a case. There should be no recourse to the International Court of Justice
as such questions would generally be economic. Decisions of the Tariff
Committee to withhold benefits from a Member should be the subject of a
qualified majority vote. In view of the close connection between Articles 17
and 81 he suggested that either the discussion of Article 81 should be
postponed until Article 17 had been drafted or a joint sub-committee should
be set up.
Mr. KOJEVE (France) agreed that it was impossible to separate Article 81
from Article 17 and from other articles. He had already reserved his position
upon Article 81 until he could compare the text of the Charter with the text
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
Mr. PARANAGUA (Brazil) agreed that it was impossible to discuss
Articles 17 and 81 separately.
Mr. MONDELLO (Italy) E/CONF .2/C. 6/W.13
Page 2
Mr. MONDELLO (Italy) supported the suggestion to establish a joint
sub-committee.
Mr. STINEBOWER (United States) thought that the sub-comittee should
suspend its work until Article 17 had been drafted.
Mr. AMADOR (Mexico) agreed that the sub-commttee should suspend its
meetings. He, pointed-out that Mexico and probably soma other countries would
be unable to accede to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade unless
its text was identical with that of the Charter.
Mr. PARANAGUA (Brazil) said that as soon as the Charter was accepted
Part Il of the General Agreement on Tariffs and. Trade would be superseded
Insofar as it was contradictory to the Charter.
Mr. KOJEVE (France), replying to the delegate of Brazil, stated that
the delegation of France at Geneva had had the point of view the delegate
of Brazil had expressed but this point of view had not been accepted. The
Generally Agreement on Tariffs and Trade now provided that Part Il would be
subject to examination and revision by unanimous agreement should its
provisions differ from the Charter.
The sub-committee agreed to suspend. Its meetings until the text of
Article 17 had been drafted by the Third Committee.
Mr. AMADOR (Mexico), speaking personally, reiterated that if the text
of the General Agreement differed from the text of the Charter the Mexican
Senate would not be able to approve accession to the General Agreement. He
thought that Article XXIX of the General Agreement implied that in case of
contradiction with the Charter the signatories of the General Agreement would
be relieved of their obligations under It.
Mr.KIOJXVE (France) queried whether a country which, by accepting the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, had incorporated it in its
constitution could propose amendments to the Charter at Havana.
The CHAIRMAN explained that in Cuba a treaty, upon ratification, did, not
become a part of the constitution but stood side by side with it. The Cuban
Government would not submit the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trede for
ratification until after the Charter had been drawn up. |
GATT Library | nv117ff9559 | Sub-Committee: On Article 81 (The Tariff Committee) : Text of Paragraph 1 as Agreed at the Firat Meeting | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 24, 1947 | Sixth Committee: Organization | 24/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.6/W.7 and E/CONF. 2/C. 6/W. 1-40 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/nv117ff9559 | nv117ff9559_90200110.xml | GATT_155 | 127 | 964 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.6.W.7
ON DU 24 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'MPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SIXTH COMMITTEE: ORGANIZATION
SUB-COMMITTEE: ON ARTICLE 81 (THE TARIFF COMMITTEE)
Text of Paragraph 1 as Agreed at the Firat Meeting
The following text of paragraph 1 of Article 81 was agreed at the
first meeting of the Sub-Committee. The agreement reached was
conditional upon the final text of Article 17 which is to be produced by
the Third Committee.
ARTICLE 81
TARFF COITTEE
1. There shall be a Teriff Committee which shall [act on behalf of the
Organization in]:
(a) [initiating] initiate the negotiations provided for
under paragraph 1 of Article 17
(b) [making] make recommendations and determinations pursuant
to paragraph 2 of Article 17. |
GATT Library | nj698kd3682 | Sub-Committee on the proposed Resolution Concerning International action relating to Employment | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 20, 1947 | First Committee: Employment and Economic Activity | 20/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.1/16 and E/CONF.2/C.1/1-26 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/nj698kd3682 | nj698kd3682_90180252.xml | GATT_155 | 259 | 2,077 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.1/16
ON DU 20 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FIRST COMMITTEE: EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
SUB-COMMITTEE ON THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION
CONCERNING INTERNATIONAL ACTION RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT
As authorized by the First Committee at its 9th meeting, 20 December 1947
the Chairman of that Committee has appointed a Sub-Committee, to be known as
Sub-Committee C, of the First Committee with the following terms of reference
(a) To examin the text of the draft Resolution prepared. by the First
Session of the Preparetory Committee, taking account of the proposed
now text of the Chapter, of any proposals which may be received from
individual delegations, and of the information reported in document
(b) To recommend whether a resolution is required and, if so, to
recommend a text for such a resolution.
Represenetatives of the following delegations will comprise the
Sub -Committee:
Australia Pakistan,
Belgium Poland.
Brazil . El Salvador
France Sweden
Italy United Kingdom
Lebanon United States of America
The Sub-Committee will elect its own Chairman.
The Sub-Committee will hold its first meeting at 2:30 p.m., Tuesday,
23 December..
The Chairman of the First Committee would remind those delegations zot
represented. in the membership of the Sub-Committee that they are entitled
to have observers at any sub-Committee meetings, to submit statements in
writing to the Sub-Committee, and to request the Chairman of the Sub-Committee
in writing that they be allowed to address the Sub-Committee orally on any
point of Particular interest to them within the competence ef the
Sub-Committee. |
GATT Library | jw400dd8291 | Suggested amendment to rules of procedure : Submitted by the Delegation of Norway | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 25, 1947 | 25/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/2/Rev.3/Add.2 and E/CONF.2/1-8 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/jw400dd8291 | jw400dd8291_90040008.xml | GATT_155 | 98 | 665 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations: Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/2/Rev.3/
Add.2
DU 25 November 1947
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SUGGESTED AMENDTMENT TO RULES OF PROCEDURE
SUBMITTED BY THE DELEGATION OF NORWAY
The delegate for Norway, the Chairman of the Sub-Committee on
Procedure, proposes that the following new Rule 54 be added to the draft
Rules of Procedure;
Rule 54
The Report of a committee or sub-committee shall give a summary
of the documents and other information on which it is based. If the
report is not unanimous, it shall set forth any divergent view. |
|
GATT Library | hd873bn0482 | Suggested Amendments to the Draft General Agreement Submitted by the Delegate for the United States and the Draft Declaration Submitted by the Delegate for the United kingdom : Prepared by the Secretariat | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 10, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee, and Sub-Committee on Tariff Negotiations | 10/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/65 and E/PC/T/C.6/61-72 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hd873bn0482 | hd873bn0482_90230126.xml | GATT_155 | 2,035 | 13,952 | United Nations
Nations Unies RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL
AND ECONOMIQUE
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET -SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE UNITED NATIONS
CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE ON TARIFF NEGOTIATIONS
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE DRAFT GENERAL AGREEMENT SUBMITTED
BY THE DELEGATE FOR THE UNITED STATES AND THE DRAFT DECLARATION
SUBMITTED BY THE DELEGATE FOR THE UNITED KINGDOM
PREPARED BY THE SECRETARIAT
10 February 1947
Preamble
[The.governments in respect of which this Agreement is signed ]
THE GOVERNMENTS OF Australia, Belgium-Luxembourg, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China,
Cuba, Czechoslovahkia, Frence, India. Lebanon*, Netherlands, New Zealand,
Norway, Union of South Africa, United States and United. Kingdom (hereinafter
referred to as the signatory governments)
[Haviing] HAVING been [named] appointed by the Economic and Social Council of
the United Nations as members of a Preparatory Committee charged. with [to
prepar] preparing, inter alia, for the consideration of [the] en International
Conference on Trade and Employment, (hereinafter referred to as the Conference)
[a Charter for an International Trade Organization of the United Nations] the
text of--a draft convention.
[Having] HAVING [as the Preparatory Committee for the Conference], in
fulfillment of this function, prepared and recommended to the Conference the
[provsions of such a] draft Charter for an International Trade Organization
of the United Nations (hereinafter. referred. to as the Charter and the
Organization respectively,) the text of which in seb forth in the Report of
the Preparatory Committee to the Economic and Social Council [; and] .
* If, as expected, Syria also participates in the negotiations, it would have
to be Included.
~ ~ ~ - ,.
- I - E/PC/T/C.6/65
Page 2
[Being desirous] DESIRING [of] to [furthering] assist the attainment of the
objectives of the Conference by [providing] the taking of such acticn prior
to the Conference as would serve as an example to all other governments of
cocrete achievement capable of [generalization to all countries on equitable
terms] univesal application
*HAVING for this purpose undertaken successfully among themselves the
negotiations referred to in Articles 24 and 32 and 33 of the Charter which
relate to negotiations for the reduction of tariffs and the elimination of
tariff preferences and for parallel action by state-trading enterprises
respectively
*AND HAVING to the came end decided to bring into effect among themselves the
provisions of all those parts of Chapter.V (General Commercial Policy) of the
Charter as are applicable at this stage-
[Have] HEREBY, THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE PIENIPOTETTIARIES, AGREE [D] AS FOLLOWS:
Article XX
1. The Interim Trade Committee shall consist of [the] one representatives [s]
[of] from each or the [contracting states] signatory governments.
-2. The- Committee [is authorized to] shall perform. such functions as are
specifically provided for in the other provisions of this Agreement, [to
provids .a mechanism for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation
of-this Agreement or arising out of its operations] and generally [to] shall
perform any other functions which may be appropriate or necessary for the full
implementation.of this Agreement and of its accompanying Declaration.
3. Each representative on the Committee shall have one vote.
[3] 4, Subject to the provisions of paragraph [4] 5 decisions of the
Committee shall be taken by a majority of -the representatives present and -
voting. -
4] L5. The Committee may, 'by a vote 'f two ohirds of [tRe]7its"members, adopt
criteria. and procedures for waiving, in exceptional circumstances, obligations
incurred. under this Agreement.- -
* The insertion of these two paragraphs and. the drafting of the appended
Declaration would mean that Article VII of the Agreement becomes unnecessary.
/[5.] 6. The seat Page 3
[5.] 6. The seat of the committee shall be established. at the seat of the
United Nations; .
7.The Secretary-General of -the United Nations shall provide such staff
and administrative services as are required, by the Committee.
8..'Subject to the provisions of this Article the Committee shall establish
its own rules - of procedure...
[5] 9. The Committee shall cease to exiet [upon the establishment of the
International Trade Organization] as soon as the Organization has been
-.established. and is' in a position to exercise -its' functions. At [which] that
time [all] the functions of the Committee [provided for in the precéding-.
Articles of this Agreement] shall be transferred to the Organization.
[Provided. that] if at [the time of the establishment of the Organization]-that
time any [contracting state] signatory government or governments should not
also-be [a] Members of the Organization, -the [contracting state] other
signatory governments shall consult together and with the Organization with a
view to assuring an appropriate voice on matters arising under this Agreement
[by] to the [contracting state] signatory government in question.
- Article XXI.
1. .-This Agreement. shall be subject to, revision [, in the light of the
provisions of the Charter for an International Trade Organization as approved
by the -International Conference on Trade and, Employment when such Charter.
shall have entered. into force] if the Conference makes such amendments or
additions to or deletions from the provisions of the Charter as make revision
desirable. The Committee shall consider..whether or not revision is
necessary or desirable and, make appropriate recomendations to the
signatory governments. ..
..
/. This A!eeomnt E/PC/T/C .6/65
Page 4
2. This Agreement may be, amended. at the request of any signatory government.
Any request for amendment shall be made to the Committee which; shall recomend
to the signatory goverrments whether the amendment proposed should be made.
[2] 3. [Amendments to this Agreement pursuant to paragraph 1 or otherwise
Revision of or amedments to this Agreement pursuant to paragraphs l and 2
respectively shall become effective upon receiving the approval of thirds
of the [contracting states] signatory governments provided, that revisions.
or [those] amendments which involve new obigation on the part of
[contracting states] signatory governments shall take effect upon acceptance
on the part of two-thirds of the [contracting states] signatory
governments for each [contracting state] signatory government accepting -
the revision or the amendments, and thereafter for each remaining [contracting
state] signatory government upon acceptance by it.
4. The Committee may determine that any [contracting state] signatory
government which has not accepted a revision or an amendment within a
period specified by the Committee. shall thereupon be obliged to withdraw'
from the Agreement. In the absence of a determination that a [contracting.
state] signatory governmet not accepting. the revision or an amendment shall
be obliged to withdraw from the Agreement, such [contracting state signatory
government shall, notwithstanding the provisions of Article XXIII, be free to
withdraw [from the Agreement] upon the expiration of- six months from the day
on which written notice of such withdrawal is received by the-
Secretary-General of .the. United Nations._:
Interpretation. and. Settlement of .Disputes- .: . . .
1. The Chinese, English, French and Spanish texts of this Agreement--shall.
be regarded as equally authoritative.
/2- Any dispute E/PC/T/C .6/65
Page 5
2. Any dispute arising out of the interpretation or operation of this
hef ntie.tation or owrattin -of this
.1.r, place to refeCrmd-in ehe icr s 'P'j6:j tb theonmitted whfth-Shiall
either rule upon the dispute itself or refer it, with the consent of the
pases to" rai ratagn upon euch terms as mRy.be eareed by the parties.
3ru. ng "rdissatismfdd zralof tte Comittee under this Ar-icle
mar, subject to such procedures as the Committee may establish, refer the
matter to the Intcrnationaignaourt gf Justize. The sjratory (overnments
f the Court in _e t=Ed ut so referred.
aticl[XXII] XXIII-
Entry into Force and Withdrawal[a nd Terminatio]n
. Each government [accepting] signatory to this Agreement shall deposit
an instrument of [aceptance] ratification with the Secretary-General of
the United Nations who will inform all interested] governments whose
invitation to the Conference has been recommended of the date of deposit
of each instrument of [acceptance] ratification and of the date on which
this Agreement enters into force under paragraph 3.
3. This Agreement shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following
the day on -which instruments .of [acceptance] ratification have been deposited
all
with the -Secretary-General of the United Nations on behalf of a stated
number of the [governments represented on the Preparatory Committee of
the International Conference-on Trade and Employment signatory governments.
4. .Each government [accepting] signing this Agreement and its accompanying
Declaratio does so in respect of its metropolitan territory and of the
overseas territories for which it has international responsibility with the
exception of those territories which are self-governing in respect of
matters provided for in [the] this Agreement.. and its accompanying
, . :- , - ,,.: E/PC/T/C.6/65
Page 6
Declaration. Each [accepting] government party to this Agreement shall
notify the Secretary- General of the United. Nations of its [acceptance]
adherence [of] to the Agreement and the Declaration on behalf of any such
.
self g-overnigC territory[EwilIign to undertake the obligations of the
Agreemen]" in respect of which the requirements of ArticleXXIVI have been
satisfied. [nd]N. Upon the date specified in such notification, the
provisions o f[the]7 this gGreement shall become plplicable to that territory.
5. Each[fcontracting stae] signatory governments hall take such reasonable
measures as may be available to it to assure the observanceocf the provisions
f. this goreement and of its accmnaeyZing Decatration by subsidiary
governemnts within its[teerritoy]7 jurisdiction.
6. Ayn[fcontracting stae]7 sgcnatryo government ay withdraw from this
gsreement, either on its own behalf or on behalf of an overseas territory
vhich is selfgcovernig. in the repnect..mento6ned in pargzraph (4) of
ratilfeXX=IIIaefter the expiration of three calendar years from the day
fn which tIis Ag,eement enters into.f rcg .of its entry -into force by
written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Upon the receipt of such notification the Secretary:-General shall promptly
inform all. interested governments. The withdrawal shall take effect six
months from the date of -the receipt of the notification by the
Secretary-General.
Article [XXIII] XXIV
[The Committee may make arrangements under which governments not
members of the Preparatory Committee of the International Conference on
Trade and Employment may accept this Agreement on terms to be agreed.
between-such governments and the Committee]
Governments which, being eligible to become Members of the Organization;
desire to achere-to this :Agreement and its accompanying Declaration may do
so by carrying out to the satisfaction of the Committee either the
negotiations mentioned in Article 24 or in.Articles 32. and 32 of the Charter
with such of the signatory governments as indicate a desire to negotiate.
/DECLARATION E/PC /T/C .6/65
Page 7
DECLARATI0N TO BE APPENDED TO THE GENERAL AGREEMENT
ON TAPIFFS AIM TRADE
At the moment of signing the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade the undersigned plenipotentiaries of the Governments on behalf
of whom the said Agreement has been signed, duly authorized to that
effect, declare on behalf of their respective Governments as follows:
1. [The Governments parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade] The signatory governments intend, for so long as each such
Government remains party to [that Agreement] the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade, to be guided in their mutual relations, within the
scope of the authority of each such Government, by the principles
embodied in the undermentioned Chapters of the [draft] Charter [of the
International.Trade Organization, as recommended this day by the
Preparatory Committee to the Economic and Social Council]:
Chapter III - Employment
Chapter IV - Economic Development
Chapter VI - Restrictve Business
Practices
Chapter VII - Inter-Governmental Commodity
Arrangements
[In the event of questions arising between any of the said
Governments as to the application of the above-mentioned principles,
the matter shall form the subject of consultation between them, and,
if necessary, between all the Governments parties to the present
Declaration, through the provisional international agency referred
to in Article I (2) of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.]*
2. The signatory governments stand ready and willing to undertake,
upon the request of any government not party to the General Agreement
on Tariffs and Trade which is eligible to become a Member of the
Orgaization, such negotiations as are necessary for and appropriate to the
adherence of such government to the said Agreement and to this Declaration.
* If Article XVII of the draft Agreement proposed by the Delegate for
the United States is accepted, it seems that this paragraph would
be superfluous. |
GATT Library | rk403mr3914 | Suggested Amendments to the Draft General Agreement Submitted by the Delegate for the United States and the Draft Declaration Submitted by the Delegate for the United Kingdom : Prepared by the Secretariat | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 12, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee, and Sub-Committee on Tariff Negotiations | 12/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/65/Rev.2 and E/PC/T/C.6/61-72 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/rk403mr3914 | rk403mr3914_90230128.xml | GATT_155 | 2,194 | 15,101 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/65/Rev.2
AND ECONOMIQUE 12 February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE UNITED NATIONS
CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE ON TARIFF NEGOTIAITIONS
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE DRAFT GENERAL AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY
THE DELEGATE FOR THE UNITED STATES AND THE DRAFT DECLARATION
SUBMITTED BY THE DELEGATE FOR THE UNITED KINGDOM
PREPARED BY THE SECRETARIAT
Preamble
[The governments in respect of which this Agreement is signed:]
THE GOVERNMENTS OF Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile , China, Cuba,
Czechoslavacia. France, India, Lebancn*, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand.
Norway, Union of South Africa, United Kingdom, United States and Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics (hereinafter referred to as the contracting parties)
[having HAVING been [named] appointed by the Eccnomic and. Social Council
of the United Nations as members of a Preparatory Committee charged with
[to prepare] preparing, inter alia, for the consideration of [the] an
International Conference on Trade and Employment, (hereinafter referred to
as the Conference) [a Charter for an International Trade Organization of
the United Nation the text of a draft convention.
[Having] HAVING [ as the Preparatory Committee -for the Conference] in
fulfillment of this function, prepared and recomended to the Conference the
[provisions of such a] draft Charter for an International Trade Organization
of the United Nations (hereinafter referred to as the Charter and the
Organization respectively,) the text of which is set forth in the Report of
* If, as expected, Syria also participates in the negotiations, it would-
have to be included..
/the Preraratory E/PC/T/C.6/65/Rev.2
Page2
the Preparatory Committee to the Economic and Social Council [;and]
[Being desirous ] DESIRING [of] to [furthering] assist the attainment of the
objectives of the Conference by [providing] the taking of such action prior
to the Conference as would serve -as an example to all other governments of
concrete achievement capable of [generalization to all countries on equitable
terms] universal apllication
*Having for this purpose undertaken successfully among themselves the
negotiations referred to in Articles 24 and 32 and 33 of the Charter which
relate to negotiations for the reduction of tariffs and the elimination of
tariff preferences and. for parallel action by state -trading enterprices
respectively
*AND HAVING to the same end decided to bring into effect among themselves the
provisicns of all those parts of Chapter V (General Ccmmercial Policy) of the
Charter as are- applicable at this stage and the provisions of Article 4
(Maintenance of Domestic Employment) and Article 13. (Governmental Assistance
to Economic Development)
[Have] HERE BY, THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE PLENTIPOTENTIARIES AGREE[D] AS FOLLOWS:
Article XX
1. The InterimTrade Committee shall consist of[the] one representative
[of]from each of the contracting [states] parties.
2. The Committee. [is authorized to]shall perform such functions as are
specifically provided for in the other provisions of this Agreement, [to
provide a mechanic for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation
of this Agreement or arising out of its operation] and generally [to]shall
perform any other functions which may be appropriate or necessary for the full
implementation of this Agreement and of its accompanying Declaration,
The insertion of these two paragraphs and the drafting of the appended
Declaration would mean that Article VII of the Agreement becomes
unncessary-
/3. Each E/PC/T/C .6/65/Rev.2
Page 3
3. Each representative on the Committee shall have one vote.
[3.]4 . Subject, to the provisions of paragraph [4] 5 decisions of the
Committee shall be taken by a majority of the representatives present and
Voting.
[4.] 5. The Committee may ,by a vote of two-thirds ot [the] its members, adopt
criteria and procedures for waiving in exceptional circumstances , obligations
incurred under this Agreement . -; -
j of the Committee :shall be established ab- st ishe4- at the seat of the -
,unite. wativns.
ry-General oSretil'nited rntions shall provide ss :f andp'Ide such staff
administrative services ys are rmmuired bZ the Coldittee.
8. Subjects the provisionrr-Of tomms Artishcll e tahe Cced~ittee alestblish
ts mm es of -procedure. -i-
mm7 9. The Coaiittee shall[uceise to exist 5pon the establishment of the
International on]T asaraoon as de Orgnianti son hthe Orgetizatin-as been
established and is in a position to exercise it[which]ions. At LfhtcJ7 that
time §4aJ the funommions o[f the Ccnittee /rovided for in the preceding
Articles ot] this Agreemansng shall be trsferred to the Organization.
] ii'aid[d thag if at Lthe time of the establishment of th] Organization7~
that tii -a [state] acting Ltpartiesateould ty or sh ca [&]z -not alsobeb
member orthe Orga[contracting 1ci~e]acther sontractingr cc--ract
allties aball consult together and with the Orpnizaa view to - ie- tv
an sppropriate opriast -voice on mattegs arisinS under thin Agreemeut
he contractig [state].tt , . .i.on
-b cantsraotn 7 p arty in question.
/ ice E/PC/T/C.6 /63/Rev .2
Page 4
Article XXI
1. This Agreement, shall be subject to revision [in the Tight of the
provisions of the Charter for an International Trade Organization, as
approved by the International Conference on Trade and Employment when such
Charter shall have entered into force] if the Conference makes such
amendements or additions to or deletions from the provisions of the Charter
as make revision desirable. The Committee shall consider .whether or not
revision is necessary or desirable and make appropriate recommondations to
the contracting parties.
2. This Agrrment may be amended at the request of any contractiong ;
Marty. y nz'qrecuest f amendement nt shall be made to thommittee ~which r
shall rmmendend. to the coacting parties whe amendement proposed sed
shou d 'be made. *j.', ' ' -'
f22 3. fAmentson otherwise] menft puruant 'to paagraph 1 er.koth3riisv7
Reursuanto' or amendphsts1 anthis APreement P'rsuant to Paragraimh l-.rd 2
resmving .Velv shalal i f fecbctive upon receiing the approve o±;
tur-thirds o the dotvraions tiS §ate parte provided that resiscans.r
tiy-tid of . 5ae
Ehosi7 amdments vIfitch in olve ractingigations on the part of' contnct"ng
Satep7~ertis sh&lJ take effect upon. acceptance on the part of two-thirds
of.each cotracting pa §yates7 artges for- ;o ntrct-n artv
acceptinm; tem revision or the or anemainings, and thereafter fc each ran~ g
coatractr5is tate paurt pon' acceptence by it.
4* The Coc2Ettee[state]dpartyine whit any contracting Ltat7 at ch
has not accepted a revision or an amendment within a period specified by.
the Committee shallo thereupon be obliged to withdraw frm the Agreement.
In the absence of[state] party ion that a contracting rtat27 nartv not
/acCeOti E/PC/T/C.6/65/Rev.2
Page-5,
accepting the revision or amendment shall be obligaed to withdraw from
the Agreement, such ,contracting [state] party shall, notwithstanding the
provisions of Article XXII, be free to withdraw [from the Agreement] upon
the expiration of six months from the day on which written notice of such
withdrawal is received by the Secretary-General of the United Nations ,
. Article XXIII
Inter rotation and Settlement of Dicoutes .. :.
l. C The 2hiEnglish ,jFrench rerd cpanish h an S texts o greres-Arement shall
bedre isd.-av lyualUL aithorltative- . .
te arising out of the interpretaion or operation of this Perat this.
. . . ... . . .
Arreemnt shammibe -rwferred in the firrt 'olace to the Coq ttee vhich shall
* t L .. * - . . . . ..
either rule uPon the dispute itoelr or refer it, with the consent of the
parties, to arbitration itoon such terms aa may be agreed by the parties.
3. Ant. sartr dissatisfied with a ruling of the Coirdttee under this
Article may, subJect to siC.-h procedures as the CouWttee mey establish,
refer the matter to the International Court of Jvstice. The contracting
narttes. accept the juriadiction of the Court in ressect of anv dlsnute,
so referred.
.Aaticie 4 7 il 1.. .-
lntr-'Into Force and .ithdral r enid'Termir_7tio -
2.- he contraction;. vartios may bind themselves to the roisions of.
,this AMeent b>' 1ain -any 0of the folovia methods: .-
(a) Si e.vithout reservation.as t2 aworovalj;
(b) -,I ED= i rS .sub.1ect-to abe cor
(c)acceseteie.. ,.vdbXec~tne
' '; = Page 6
[2] 3. [each government accepting this agreement shall deposit an instrument
of acceptence] Acceptace shall be effected by the deposeit of a formal
instrument with the Secretary--General of the United Nations [who] the
Secretary-General will inform all interested govrnments of the date of coach
signature and of the deposit of each instrument of acceptance and of the date
on which this Agreement enters into force under paragraph 3.
3. This Agreement shall enter into force on the thirtieth day follwing the
day on which [instruments of, acceptance have been deposited with the Secretary-
all
General of the United Nations on behalf of] [a stated number] of the
[governments represented, on the Preparatory Committee of the International
Conference on Trade and Employmnet 7 cotracting parties have bound themselves
to its provisions. ' - - ' -. -
4.: - Bac government /accapti g b nding itself to- this Agreement wnd -its-
acc of n7ing Declaaet'oxi does so inxrespectbf .its metropolitan territory and
the overseas .territcries :Cr hicb-it - has International responsibility
wit wtze. -ex eptioa of ',nhose erritoriea.yhich are. self -goerniag-In -respect
of mmentaand its accom[anying n:. f this. AgreeeiAts .aocomsanyi-ng1.
Deplaration. Each /accent ng7ll vernment -arty to this Agreembrt-shaW--notify
the Secretary[General of the -Unitea&Nstions of-its /acceptan-,-7 adherence /W
to the Agreement and the -Declaratlon on behalf of any such self-governing
territory killing to undertake the obligations o.ah Agr-eement - in.respect
of which the requirements of Article cxIV as to negotiations have been
satisfied. > dJ pon. the date speclfied.In su6h rstif-icatiion ther- -
provisions of Lthe/ tis A meement shall. becoe a plicable- - t6that territory.
5. Each contracting f/itate7 party shall -take suich-ressonable meastes as
m y be ay.nce-of -ie provisions -thea observaiee Zk-th& vr4oigns -of this
Agreement and of its accompai7g Declnaration by subsidiary- -governmeit
within its 5eritory7 jurisdiction.
6. Any. contracting Statt 7 -party may withdraw from this Agreement, either on
Its own behalf or on behalf of an overseas territory which is self-governing
in the respect mentIoned in paragraph (4) of Article XXIII, after the E/PC/T/C.6/65/Rev. 2
Page 7
expiration of three calendar years from the day on which this Agreement
enters into force7 of its entry into force by written notification addressed
to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Upon the receipt of such
notification the Secretary-General shall promptly inform all interested
governments. The withdrawal shall take effect six months from the date of
the receipt of the notification by the Secretary-General.
Article [XXIII] XXIV
.he Committee may make Arrangements under which governments not members
of the Preparatory Committee of the International Conference on Trade and
Employment may accept this Agreement on terms to be agreed between such
governments and the Committee]
Adherence
Govertments which, being eligible to become Members of the Organization,
desire to adhere to this Agreement and its accompanying Declaration may do
so by carrying cut to the satisfaction of the Committee either the
negotiations mentioned in Article 24 or in Aiticles 31 and 32 of the Charter
with such of the signatory governments as indicate a desire to negotiate and
by then employing any of the methods mentioned in Article XXIII.
DECLARATION TO BE ATE-ODED TO T GENERAL AGREEMENT
ON TARIFS AND TRADE
At the moment of [signing] binding their respective Governments to the
provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade the undersigned
plenipotentiaries of the Governments on behalf of wham the said Agreement
has been signed] duly authorized to that effect, declare on behalf of their
respective Governments as follows;
1. The Governments parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
intend, for so long as each such Government remains party to that Agreement to
'be guided in their mutual relations, within the scope of the authority of
each such Government, by the principles embodied in the undermentioned
Chapters of the [draft] Charter if the International Trade Organization, as
recommended this day by the Preparatory Committee to the Econcmic and Social
council] E/rC/T/C.6/65/Rev. 2
page 8
Chapter III - Employment
Chapter IV-- Economic Development . :
C'hapter VI -Restictive Business
Practices R. - ' , . ',';Prac,4 es'-
ChapterVTI. - inter-Governmental. Cc=dty . '
Arrantemente*! >_B*_, __
t. x -. 8 w- ! ,*.... . .
/ the event of questions arising betweetz any of the si;d Gcv&=m.ets
as to the applications of the above-mentloned principles, the matter shall
form the subject of consultation between them, and, if necessary, between all
the Governents parties to the present Declaration, through the provisional
internet onal agency referred to In Article I (2) of the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade J *
2. The contracting parties stani ready and-,willing to undertake, upon the
request of any government not tarty., -the General .4greement.on Tariffs arl
..Trade which is eligible to become a Member of the' Crganlaiion, such
negotiations as are necessary for and appropriate to the adherence of such
government to the said Agreement and to this Declaration.
~~~~~~~~~~~
,- . .. -
of th .r :A _ ,_*.t.____
~ ~~~~~ .. ..
~~~~~~ ~~~~~ -~ . -. -
.
* If Artcle I~T o~ thedt Aeemen p~opias~d_ bythe..efor thle
Uinzted_ Statpe". isccaepd, isee.mz that his paragraph wouldc be
8uperfJ2'us. [ , : > - . |
GATT Library | gg583sx9454 | Suggested Draft by the Netherlands Representative of Article 77 (Article 66 of U.S. Draft Charter) : Functions of Commodity Commission | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 7, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 07/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/W.57 and E/PC/T/C.6/W/26-58 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gg583sx9454 | gg583sx9454_90230262.xml | GATT_155 | 186 | 1,396 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL
AND ECONOMIQUE 7 February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS COMFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Suggested draft by the Netherlands Representative of Article 77
(Article 66 of U.S. Draft Charter)
Functions of Commodity Commission
The Commodity Commission shall have the following functions:
1. To investigate commodity problems and arrangements proposed for
solving them and to prepare the reviews called for in Article 55.
2.To advise and make recommendations to the Executive Board with
regard to the actions of the Organization on inter-Governmental
commdity arrangements [under Articles 48, 49, 50, 51, 52%, 54, 55, 56,
57.] [under Chapter VII] and Article 30(4).
3. If so requested by a Commodity Council to nominate the Chairman
of such a Commodity Council and to enter into consultation with
Commodity Councils regarding their Secretariat.
4. To approve the rules of procedure governing the activities of
Commodity Councils.
5. To consult as necessary with other interested commissions of the
organization in regard to advice to be given in connection with
Articles 61 and 66(2). |
GATT Library | nn114tk3976 | Suggested Redraft of Article 17 - Reduction of Tariffs and Elimination of Preferences : (Submitted For Discussion by the Delegation of Australia) | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 22, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 22/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.9 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/nn114tk3976 | nn114tk3976_90190427.xml | GATT_155 | 949 | 6,066 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE RESTRICTED
ON DU 22 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE 'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
SUGGESTED REDRAFT 0F ARTICLE 17 - REDUCTION OF TARIFFS AND
ELIMINATION OF PREFERENCES
(Submitted For Discussion by the Delegation of Australia)
1. Each Member shall, upon the request of other Member or of the
Organization, enter into and carry out with such other Member or Members as
the Organization may specify, negotiations directed to the substantial
reduction of tariffs and other charges on imports and exports and to the
elimination of the preferences referred. to in paragraph 2 of Article 16
on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis, These negotiations shall
proceed in accordance with the following rules:
(a) A Member shall transmit to the Tariff Committee and to any other
Member a proliminars list of tariff concessions which it proposes to
request of that Member, This list should set forth for each product
concerned
(i) the existing rate of duty
(ii) the requested rate-of duty.
(b) At the commencement of any negotiations each Member shall submit to
the Tariff Committee man to other negotiating Members a schedule of the
proposed concessions which it would be prepared to grant to all other
Members in the light of the concessions it has requested and already
enjoys as a non-Member of the Tariff Committee.
(c) A Member may, if it so desires, give consideration only to requests
for tariff or preference concessions on products of which the other
Members individually or collectively are, or are likely to be principal
suppliers.
(d) Responses shall be considered on a selective, product by product
basis so that the Member from whom a concession is requested may give
full consideration to all factors regarding each product the subject
of a request, A Member may decide in relation to a request on any
particular product
(i) to make no concession.
/(ii) to bind E/CONF.2/0.3/A/W.9
Page 2
(ii) to bind a tariff rate at its present or at a higher or lower
level.
(iii) to reduce a margin of preference to a greater or lesser oxtent
than that requested.
In making such decision a member may have regard to the existing level of the
tariff rate in relation to its fiscal needs and its plans for economic
development and to the total extent of the concessions being offered and
received by it:
(e) In the negotiations relating to any specific product
(i) when a reduction is negotiated only in the most-favoured-nation
rate, such reduction shall operate automatically to reduce or
eliminate the margin of preference applicable to that product;
(ii) when a reduction is negotiated only in the preferontial rate
the most-favoured-nation rate shall automatically be reduced to
the extent of such reduction;
(iii) when it is agreed that reductions will be negotiated in both
the nost-favoured-nation rate and the preferential rate, the
reduction in each shall be that agreed by the parties to the
neg??tiations;
(iv) no margin of preference shall be increased.
(f) The binding of low tariffs or of tariff-free treatment shall in
principle be recognized as a concession equivalent in value to the
substantial reduction of-high tariffs or the elimination of wariff
preferences.
(a) Account shall be taken of any concessions which either Member is
already extending to the other Member by virtue of previous negotiation
regarding tariffs and preferences pursuant to this Article.
2. The results of such negotiations shall be incorporated in the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, signed at ......... on ........ 1947 by
agreement with the parties to that Agreement, and.there upon the parties to
such negotiation shall become contracting parties to the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade if they are not so already.
3. If any Member considers that any other Member has failed to fulfil its
obligations under paragraph 1 of this Article , such Member may refer the
matter to the Organization. [ which, after investigation]
The Organization shall investigate the matter taking into account
(a) the economic position of the Member concerned and its fiscal
and developmental requirements;
(b) the total extent of. the concessions offered;
(c) the -provisions of the Charter as a whole:
/and, in the case E/CONF. 2/C. 3/A/W. 9
Page 3
and, in the case of a non-Member of the Tariff Committee
(d) the concessions available to that non-Member by virtue of
Membership in the Organization.
and in the light of the results of the investigation shall make
appropriate recommendations to the Members concerned.
4. If the Organization finds that a Member has failed without sufficient
justification, [having regard to its economic position and the provisions of
the Charter as a whole] to carry out negotiations within a reasonablo period
of time in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article, the
Organization may determine that any Member or Members shall, notwithstanding
the provisions of Article 16, be entitled to withhold from the trade of the
other Member any of the tariff benefits which may have been negotiated pursuant
to paragraph 1 of this Article, and embodied in Part I of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. If such benefits are in fact withheld so as
to result in the application to the trade of the other Member of tariffs
higher than would. otherwise have been applicable, such other Member shall
then be free, within sixty days after such action is taken, to withdraw from
the Organization upon the expiration of sixty days from the date on which
written notice of such withdrawal is received by the Organization.
2. The provisions of this Article shall operate in accordance with the
provisions of Article 81. |
GATT Library | zz607mf2111 | Suggested Redraft of Articles 35 (2) and 86 by the Delegation of the United Kingdom | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 10, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 10/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/W.63 and E/PC/T/C.6/W/58-80 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zz607mf2111 | zz607mf2111_90230270.xml | GATT_155 | 468 | 3,180 | United Nations Nations Unies
ECONOMIC CONSEIL
AND ECONOMIQUE 10 February 1947
SOCIAL. COUNCIL . ET. SOCIAL. ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY
ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUGGESTED REDRAFT OF ARTICLES 35 (2) AND 86
BY THE DELEGATION OF THE UNITED KINGDOM - - ,
Article 86
ioi. Im-~l inI aid rnt euncL ites
1. ng -inthiA article shall be no.suraed to lim t- or exclude
otr prz odeceras established in this Charter for consultation. over and
ttlemu;ent of. mpailaints or difficulties arising out oi Its operation.
2 If any mbMeer considers that anotheMr embeh bas adopted any measure,
wheethr or noit t constitutes a breach ofnax obligation duner this
Chaer o, r.th a;eny situation has arisen, which has the eefocf of
'nulfy.Yg ,1ormprLairing-any object of this Charter, it may invite the
Members concerned to consult thereon dnc they shallI endeavour to-reach
a satfs-actory settlement.
thro. . .
r consultation over and berahr h atrm-erfre
4y ouadne of the xecutive Bearcl shal be reviewed 'by te.
Conferonceiat thedroqyest of any-intereste& Member.. -Upon. such request
the Conforence shall by resolution ofatehe majority confirm or emnd or.
.d rh. .ete .l;n -Wrvide& tbatC
a(a ) t ~hl, ineessryconsult with the Economic and Social
no..611ions a"o fwthe United Natnd vith any other appropriate.
inter-gov3ns ntdorganizatioe; an&
()ivflvet h ei pmta tr inovsadsueas -to the interpretation, of
tlw Charter, it shallnc ao the instae ef -not less t an one-thirdLof the
/Members E/PC/T/C.6/W.63 i
Page 2
Members request from the International Court of Justice an
advisory opinion thereon and any proceedings for the review
by the Conference of such a rulling of the Board shall
thereupon be staid until the opinion of the Court is
delivered,. and the Conference, when it finally reviews such
ruling shall adopt and: be bound by the advisory opinion
delivered by the Court. The Conference after reviewing the
rulling may make such further recommendations to the Members
concerned as it things fit.
5. If it considers, in any case brought' before it in-pursuance of this
Article, that a breach of obligations under this Charter or that nullification
or impairment of any object of this Charter has taken place of a character
serious enough to justify such action, the Conference may authorize any
Member or Members to suspend the application to any other Member or
Members of such obligations or concessions under the Charter as it may
specify. If such obligations or concessions are, in fact, suspended, any
affected Member shall then be, free, not later than 60 days after such
action is taken, to withdraw from the Organization upon the expiration of
60 days from the date on which written notice of such withdrawal is
received by the Organization.
6. The Executive Board and the Conference shall respeitively make
rules of procedure for giving effect this Article. |
GATT Library | jj170nb1964 | Suggestion by the Delegate for Australia Technical Sub-Committee | United Nations Economic and Social Council, January 30, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 30/01/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/W.33 and E/PC/T/C.6/W/26-58 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/jj170nb1964 | jj170nb1964_90230237.xml | GATT_155 | 138 | 1,026 | United Nations
Nations Unies
ECONOMIC CONSEIL RESTRICTED
AND ECONOMIQUE E/PC/T/C.6/w.33
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL 30 January 194 :
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE
OF THE UNITED NATI0NS CONFANENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUGGESTION BY THE DELEGATE FOR AUSTRALIA
TECHNICAL SUB-COMMITTEE
Article 18, Paragraph: 2(2)
The value for duty of imported, goods should be based on the
[actual] value at which, in the usual and ordinary course of trade,
identically similar goods are sold or offered for sale for cash in
like quantitis and under similar ccnditions of sale in the principal
market of the country of export and at the date of exportation to any
and every purchaser, or the nearest, etc.
Note:- This suggestion was withdrawn after havin
been taken into account in modifying a
draft text of the same sub-paragraph
presented by Canada. |
GATT Library | db450qc8298 | Suggestion by the Delegation of Czechoslovakia | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 10, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 10/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/W.60 and E/PC/T/C.6/W/58-80 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/db450qc8298 | db450qc8298_90230267.xml | GATT_155 | 114 | 936 | United Nations Nations Unies
ECONOMIC CONSEIL
AND ECONOMIQUE 10 February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISHC
DAFMINTG COMITTMEE OF PREPARATR1Y CMMITIEE7 OFTHE,
UNIEDT NATINMS COFERENICEONT TRADE AM, C Z MEN;T
UG!GESTION BY HEM ELEGGATION OF CZECHOSLOVAIEA
Article 35
Consultation - Nullification oriImparmeent
'th reference to the third to the last line of page 5 of document
E/PC/T/C.6/29, the Delegation of Czechoslovakia wishes to state that it
agreed with the joint amendment of the Delegations of the United States
and the United Kingdom, subject only to the inclusion of the words
"Whether state-trading, monopoly or private" after the words "of
particular business enterprises". (See document E/PC/T/C.6/28/Rev.1,
page 2, Article 35, paragraph 1, line 10). |
GATT Library | xz646gt4184 | Suggestions for Amendments to Article 17 : (Submitted by the Delegate for the United States) | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 22, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 22/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.7 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xz646gt4184 | xz646gt4184_90190425.xml | GATT_155 | 112 | 768 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W .7
22 December 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
SUGGESTIONS FOR AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 17
(Submitted by the Delegate for the United States)
1. (e) Such negotiations shall be conducted on a selective, product-by-
product, basis such as will afford an adequate opportunity for taking
into account the needs of individual countries and individual industries.
4. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to require any Member to
reduce the tariff, or bind it against increase, or to reduce or eliminate
the preference, on any particular product. |
GATT Library | ty695hz6582 | Summary Record : Eighteenth Meeting in Executive Session Held on Thursday, 19 June 1947, at 2.30 p.m. in the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, July 12, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment | 12/07/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/18 and E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ty695hz6582 | ty695hz6582_90210073.xml | GATT_155 | 112 | 939 | RESTRICTED NATIONS UNIES
UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/18
AND ECONOMIQUE 12 July 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL : ENGLISH
SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD
Eighteenth Meeting in Executive Session
Held on Thursday, 19 June 1947, at 2.30 p.m. in the
Palais des Nations, Geneva.
Chairman: The Hon. L:D .Wilgress (Canada)
EIGHTH REPORT BY THE TARIFF NEGOTIATIONS WORKING PARTY.
The CHAIRMAN invited the Executive Session to approve
the Eighth Report of the Tariff Negotiations Working Party on
the Progress of Tariff Negotiations documentt E/PC/T/101 of
18 June 1947). The Report was approved without discussion.
The meeting closed at 2.40 p.m. |
GATT Library | xb151hr3312 | Summary Record : Eighth Meeting in Executive Session held on Thursday, 22 May 1947, at 10.30 a.m. at the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, May 22, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment | 22/05/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/8 and E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xb151hr3312 | xb151hr3312_90210061.xml | GATT_155 | 793 | 5,084 | RESTRICTED
UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES CONSEIL
AND ECONOMIQUE E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/8
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL 22 May, 1947
SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD
Eighth Meeting in Executive Session held on
Thursday, 22 May 1947, at 10.30 a.m.
at the Palais des Nations, Geneva.
Chairman: M. Max Suetens (Belgium)
In the continuation of the discussion of the amendment
of Chile, Syria and the Lebanon, to Article 14 (E/PC/T/W27),
Mr. ANGEL FAIVOVICH (Chile) said he would postpone his
decision to withdraw his amendment until a special sub-Committee
on Articles 13, 14 and 38 presented its findings.
Mr. FERREIRA BRAGA (Brazil) thought that Article 14 should
be maintained as it stands and when Article 38 will be discussed
at a later stage the Chilean amendment should come again under
consideration.
Mr. WINTHROP BROWN (United States) shared the views of the
Delegate for Brazil and thought it unnecessary to set up a Sub-
Committee to deal with the Chilean amendment to Article 14.
Mr. Noussa MOBARAK (Lebanon) supported the Chilean proposal
that Articles 13, 14 and 38 should be referred to a sub-Committee.
The CHAIRMAN pointed out that a Sub-Committee on Articles
13, 14 and 38 would find itself in the same difficulty as the
Committee itself because the Sub-Committee would not know what
might be resolved on these Articles at a later stage.
Mr. ANGEL FAIVOVICH (Chile) thought that he could not see
his way to withedraw his amendment and present it again when
other Articles are discussed. E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/8
page 2
Mr. McCARTHY (Australia) thought that though the Chilean
amendment could not be accepted under Article 14 a Sub-Committee
should be appointed at once to examine in what way the Chilean
proposal could be met by reference to other Articles.
Mr. HOLMES (United Kingdom) could not agree with the
suggestion made by the Delegate for Australia. Such Sub-Committee
or Working Party would face the same difficulties and much of
its work might be wasted if it tried to consider the Chilean
proposal in connection with Articles which still had to receive
a general reading.
Mr. VAN DER POST (South Africa) thought that a small ad
hoc Sub-Committee could examine the amendment of Chile, Syria
and the Lebanon.
Mr. NATHAN (France) proposed that a Sub-Committee should
be set up if in the course of the lator discussion of Article 38
it would appear that a Sub-Committee could deal with the
difficulties.
Mr. WILGRESS (Canada) explained that when the Tariff
Negotiations Working Party, of which he was the Chairman, found
that the reservation and the subsequent amendment made by the
Chilean Delegation was an obstacle to the progress of the tariff
negotiations, that Working Party recommended that the Committee
considered the Chilean amendment in advance of other parts of
the Charter. He agreed with the Delegates for the United Kingdom
and France that the appropriate course to deal with the Chilean
amendment in this Committee was to wait until Articles 13 and 38
were discussed.
Mr. ANGEL FAIVOVICH (Chile) thought that the debate had
shown two aspects of the problem, that of substance and of procedure E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/8
page 3
The Committee should definitely decide to solve the substance of
the problem and not embark on discussion of procedure.
Mr. McCARTHY (Australia) repeated his proposal that a Sub-
Committee should deal with Articles of the Charter other than
Article 14 which were relevant to the Chilean amendment.
Mr. GUERRA (Cuba) suggested that a Sub-Committee should be
set up immediately to report within twenty-four hours to the
Committee whether the Chilean amendment to Article 14 should be
discussed or whether it should come under Articles 13 or 38.
The CHAIRMAN asked the Committee to vote on the proposal
that the Chilean amendment be accepted for consideration as an
amendment to Article 14. The proposal was negatived.
The CHAIRMAN then submitted to the vote of the Committee
the proposal of the Cuban Delegate to appoint an ad hoc Sub-
Committee to study within 24 hours whether the proposal made by
the Delegates for Chile, Syria and the Labanon could be met by
other means than article 14 of the Charter.
The proposal was not carried.
The CHAIRMAN put to the vote the proposul made by the
Australian Delegation to appoint immediately a Sub-Committee which
would study the amendment of the representatives of Chile, Syria
and the Lebanon in connection with Articles of the Charter, other
than Article 14.
The Australian proposal was rejected by
Six for
Eight against
Three abstentions
Mr. ANGEL FAIVOVICH (Chile) made a formal reservation on
Article 14 as it stands now and Mr. Moussa MOBARAK (Lebanon)
associated himself with this reservation on behalf of Syria and
the Lebanon.
The Meeting rose at 12.45 p.m. |
GATT Library | th158jv1690 | Summary Record : Eleventh Meeting in Executive Session held on Frida, May 30, 1947, at 10.30 a.m. at the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, May 31, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment | 31/05/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/11 and E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/th158jv1690 | th158jv1690_90210065.xml | GATT_155 | 551 | 3,806 | UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES
ECONOMIC CONSEIL RESTRICTED
AND ECONOMIQUE E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/11 31 May 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Summary Record
Eleventh Meeting in Executive Session held on
Frida, May 30, 1947, at 10.30 a.m. at the
Palais des Nations, Geneva.
CHAIRMAN : M. SUETENS (Belgium)
Mr. WILGRESS (Canada), as Chairman of the Working Party on
Tariff Negotiations, presented the Working Party's recommendation
concerning the communication of information on changes in lists
of tariff concessions-offered (E/PC/T.76). Mr. Wilgress pointed
out that although the working g Party's first report provided a
satisfactory method for the exchange of original offers, no
machinery had been set up whereby various Delegations could be
kept informed of changes in these offers. The Working Party
therefore recommended a procedure whereby Delegations would have
the option of providing information regarding changes in tariff
rates directly to other Delégations with which they were in
negotiation or of asking the Secretariat to do it. This
procedure would fill in the gap still existing in the machinery
for tariff negotiations, thereby ensuring the multilateral
character of the negotiations, while involving the least
possible burden on the Delegations concerned.
The recommendation of the Tariff Negotiations Working
Party was adopted.
Mr. HAWKINS (United States), as Chairman of the Charter
steering Committee, presented the Joint Report of the Charter
P.T.O. E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/11
page 2.
Stearing Committee and the Tariff Negotiations Working Party
(E/PC/T.81). Mr. Hawkins explained that the schedule for Charter
discussions previously adopted by the Preparatory Committee
(E/PC/T.72 and 78) had been revised in order to meet the diffi-
culties being experienced by certain Delegations in providing
representation at the same time for Charter discussions and tariff
negotiations. The revised schedule, if adopted, would become effec-
tive beginning Tuesday, June 3rd. The Joint Steering group strongly
recommended its adoption since they believed it would be helpful to
all Delegations if a schedule were established as soon as possible.
Mr. FAIVOVICH (Chile) expressed appreciation for the efforts
of the Joint Steering group to meet the difficulties of the smaller
Delegations. While in general agreement with the report, he sugges-
ted that if it were necessary to hold simultaneous meetings of
Commissions A and B, as mentioned in the report, the dates and times
for such meetings should be discussed and agreed in advance.
Mr. JOHNSON (New Zealand) proposed that Articles 31, 32 and
33 be considered prior to Articles 25 and 27. The New Zealand
Delegation had submitted amendments to Articles 4,13 and 25 with
which they did not propose to proceed if they could obtain acoommo-
dation in respect to their amendments to Article 33.
Mr. COLBAN (Norway), Chairman of the Working Party on
Technical Article enquired whether it was intended to discuss
Articles 16-23 and 37 in a Commission meeting or a sub-committee
meeting. It was agreed that Articles 16-23 and 37 should be
discussed by Commission A.
Mr.HAWKINS (United States) suggested that the Report of the
Joint Steering Group be amended to indicate that the Charter
Steering Committee, in consideration of the difficulties of the
smaller Delegations, would attempt to avoid conflicts between
meetings of Commissions A and B.
The Joint Report of the Charter Steering Committee and the
Working Party on Tariff Negotiations was adopted as amended. |
GATT Library | bk561tb9737 | Summary Record : Fifteenth Meeting in Executive Session held on Thursday, 12 June 1947, at 2.30 p.m. in the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, June 13, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment | 13/06/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/15 and E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bk561tb9737 | bk561tb9737_90210069.xml | GATT_155 | 223 | 1,573 | RESTRICTED
UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/15
ECONOMIC CONSEIL 13 June 1947.
AND ECONOMIQUE ORIGINAL : ENGLISH
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL
SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT.
Summary Record
Fifteenth Meeting in Executive Session held on
Thursday, 12 June 1947, at 2.30 p.m. in the
Palais des Nations, Geneva.
Chairman: Mr. Max Suetens (Belgium)
1. Report of the Tariff Negotiations working Party.
The CHIRMAN invited the Executive to approve the
Report of the Tariff Negotiations working Party on the progress
of Tariff Negotiations (document E/PC/T/92 of 9 June 1947).
The Report was approved without discussion.
2. Statement by the Delegate for Belgium (document E/PC/T/90).
At the request of the Chairman the Executive Secretary
addressed the Meeting in connection with the statement made by
the Delegate for Belgium at the Fourteenth Meeting in Executive
Session on 9 June 1947: it had been suggested in document
E/PC/T/96 that a special meeting of the Executive Session to
discuss the statement might be held on 16 June, but several
delegations had asked for postponement and he therefore proposed
that the meetings of Commission B on Article 30 should be
held on 16 and 17 June, so that the discussion of the Belgian
statement might take place on the afternoon of Wednesday
18 June. This re-arrangement of meetings was approved. |
GATT Library | pc854dn7656 | Summary Record : Fifth Meeting in Executive Session held on Tuesday, 20 May 1947 at 3.00 p.m. at the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, May 20, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment | 20/05/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/5 and E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/pc854dn7656 | pc854dn7656_90210058.xml | GATT_155 | 933 | 6,210 | UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES RESTRICTED
E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/5
ECONOMIC CONSEIL 20 May 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
AND ECONOMIQUE
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL
SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD
Fifth Meeting in Executive Session held on
Tuesday, 20 May 1947 at 3.00 p.m. at the
Palais des Nations, Geneva
Chairman: M. Max Suetens (Belgium)
The CHAIRMAN opened the meeting and invited Mr. NASH (New
Zealand) to speak. Mr. NASH emphesized that if the objectives
of the Charter were to be achieved it would have to be adapted to
meet the needs not only of free enterprise economies on the one
hand or state enterprise economies on the other but also of
government regulated economies which combine opportunities for
free enterprise with government regulation where necessary. He
stressed the obligations of all countries to assist in securing
a distribution of the world's resources through international
trade which would contribute to the achievement of the general
objectives contained in Chapter III. To give effect to these
views Mr. NASH proposed an amended version of articlee 33 relating
to the expansion of trade by states completely monopolizing or
controlling their foreign trade.
The CHAIRMAN expressed the appreciation of the Committee for
Mr. NASH'S remarks and proposed that, while it would not be
possible to discuss the amendment of Article 33 at this stage,
individual Delegations having views on the proposal might wish
to discuss them with Mr. NASH before his departure. E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/5
page 2.
ARTICLE 3, paragraph 2
The chairman then called for coninuation of the discussion
on Article 35 paragraph 2 There was sore discussion on the
amendments proposed in the first four linos, including particularly
the necessity or desirability of making a reference to "production".
In addition, several Delegations expressed the view that the
emendments proposed relating to ''intermational section" might be
regarded as limiting the authority or responsibility of the
Economic and Social Council and that, in particular, the amend-
ment in this respect proposed by the Netherlands Delegation by
appeaing to confind action to countries "substontially
interested" might llimit international action unduly. Mr.
WILCOX (United States) expressed the view that the amendment
proposed by the United States Delegation on this point did not
curtail the authority of the Economic and Social Council but
merely attempted to avoid the appeaance of attributing to that
Council any authority not already possessed under the United
Nations Chater. Dr. lokanathan (India) doubted that the
expression was spipulated in the Charter in the amendment
proposed by the Cuban delegation could be regarded as qdequate
in view of the fact that, during that Firstt Session, there had
been a geneal recognition that many foms of inernational
action not specifically covered by the Charter were expected.
After this discussion the amendments on this Article were
referred tto the Sub-Committee, with the excepttion of the Cuban
amendment concerning inter-change of information, which was
adopted.
ARTICLE. 4
Discussion then prroceeded on the various amendments proposed
to Article 4. Thee was some discussion concousin/ inclusion
of "prorduction and "demand" in the aticle of the article (and the
addition of thte word "poduction" in the first line of the E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/5.
page 3,
amendment proposed by the United States Delegation to paragraph
2), with some Delegations expressing the view that these
additional words might weaken the signiricance of this article
in relation to Employment Mr. NASH (New Zealand.) doubted
that the words 'high and stable levels" could be regarded es
adequete since they were intended te reter to progress and not
to a stationary condition. - He thought that the expression
" large and growing might also be open to misinterpretation.
He expressed his preference for the term "high and steadily
rising levels". The various proposals were referred, after some
discussion, to the Sub-Committee, The proposal of the United
States Delegation that "members shall seek to avoid measures
which would have the effect of ... . was approved after Mr.
FREQUET (Cuba) indicated that the Cuban Delegation withdrew
its propose to have tho words "seek to" deleted. There was no
dissent from the suggestion of the representative of BRAZIL
than, as in the case of Article 3, the words '-goods and services"
might be added after "demand " in this Article,
ARTICLE 5
The amendment proposed by the Delegation of CUBA to insert
the words "achievement and" before `maintenance; in Article 5
was accepted. The various versions ot an amendment to this
Article to cover relations with appropriate inter-Governments
organizations were discussed and the representative of the ILO
made a statement to the Committee concerning the functions and
authority of that Organization, Mention was made by the
representatives of the United States end United Kingdom of the
desirability of providing for the case of a country which might
be a member of the ITO but not a member of the ILO. These
amendments were referred to the sub-committee. Mr. NASH (New
Zealand) suggested that the words "for export and generally" E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/5.
page 4.
should be deleted. After some discussion it appeared that the
present language would be satisfactory end or NASH withdrew
his amendment.
The chairman proposad thet the discussion of the important
amendments proposed in articles 6 and 7 should be deferred until
the next meeting. He proposed that, for the further consideration
of amendments which ha. been discussed in the committee but on
which agreement had not been reached, the Sub-cmmitttes should
consist of representatives Gf the Delegations of Australia,
Belgium, Cuba, India and the United States, and that this
Sub-Committee should meet on Wednesday afternoon, 21. May.
The meeting rose et 6.10 p.m. |
GATT Library | xm900bb9663 | Summary Record : Fourteenth Meeting, in Executive Session held on Monday, 9 June 1947, at 2.30 p.m. in the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, June 11, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment | 11/06/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/14 and E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xm900bb9663 | xm900bb9663_90210068.xml | GATT_155 | 727 | 4,947 | UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES RESTRICTED
E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/14
ECONOMIC CONSEIL 11 June 1947
AND ECONOMIQUE ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL
SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT.
Summary Record
Fourteenth Meeting, in Executive Session held on
Monday, 9 June 1947, at 2.30 p.m. in the Palais
des Nations, Geneva.
Chairman: The Hon. L. D. Wilgress (Canada)
1. Progress of Tariff Negotiations
The CHAIRMAN, in his capacity of Chairman of the Tariff
Negotiations Working Party, referred to document E/PC/T/86
in which was presented the Working Party's recommendation
that a questionnaire be addressed to Delegations fortnightly
in order that the Working Party might obtain a clear indication
of the progress being made in respect of the various tariff
negotiations.
Subject to the deletion of the word "satisfactory" from
the proposed second question of the questionnaire, the Report
was adopted.
2. Statement by the Delegate of Belgium
Mr. FORTHOMME (Belgium) read a statement on the general
policy of the Committee with regard to the Charter. He
mentioned the purposes laid down in the original draft of the
Charter and he stated that the Belgium-Luxembourg Economic Union
had accepted membership of the Preparatory Committee on the
understanding that its debates and activities would serve to
perfect a Charter as an instrument of economic liberation. E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/14
page 2.
In the discussions of the Committee, however, there was
evident a trend in the direction of confirming each and every
privilege simply because it exists and of condoning every form
of restriction merely because it has become a habit; at the
same time there was a general refusal to face the fact that the
protection gained by these practices would have to be paid for
many times over by the disastrous consequences they entail.
He said that these developments were a cause of great anxiety
to the Belgium-Luxembourg Delegation; a status of privilege
is being given to state-trading countries to countries which
give and receive preferences, to under-developed countries etc.
But from these special provisions the Belgium-Luxembourg Union
would gain no advantage.
Mr. Forthomme continued by declaring that the Belgium-
Luxembourg Union had always been cautious in matters of prot-
ection and, together with the Netherlands, had again shown mod-
eration in the new common tariff which is the basis of the
present negotiations; they would have resort to the exceptions
allowed by the Charter only in the last extremity and unfortun-
ately the development of the Charter was such that it might
soon threaten disaster for a country such as Belgium which
would be bereft of means of action while other countries were
fortified by exceptions and privileges.
Consequently, Mr. Forthomme declared that the Charter
would be the death sentence of the Belgium-Luxembourg Union
unless there was a return to the original spirit of freedom
and a striving for ever freer trade; the sacrifices of each
Member should be proportionate to their economic power and
to the special privileges they enjoy, and a greater measure E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/14
page 3
of equality should be established in the means of action and
defence available to each Member while general prosperity should
be sought in orderly and balanced developments.
Dr. SPEAKENBRINK (Netherlands) said that his Delegation
fully shared the feelings of their Belgian colleague on many
matters, but on certain problems they differed somewhat in
opinion; for example the Netherlands had established some
degree of state-trading in agricultural products and were
interested in the development of certain areas such as the
East Indies.
Mr. FAIVOVICK (Chile) suggested that there should be
a special meeting of the Executive Committee for a discussion
of the statement made by the Belgian Delegate and of the
general position of this Conference with regard to the main
principles laid down in the Charter.
Mr. MARTINS (Brazil) said that the principles expressed
in the Belgian statement were acceptable in general but he
wished to mention that one of the purposes of the Charter
should be to harmonize the relations betwen developed and
undeveloped countries; the Charter, he said, muct reflect
existing differences in the level of industry.
Mr. AUGENTHALER (Czechoslovakia) agreed that a special
meeting should be held to discuss the Belgian statement.
On the proposal of the CHAIRMAN it was agreed that a
special meeting of the Preparatory Committee in executive
Session should be arranged by the Executive Secretary.
The meeting closed at 3.35 p.m. |
GATT Library | cj635pr0753 | Summary Record : Fourth Meeting in Executive Session held on Tuesday, 20 May 1947 at 10.30 a.m. at the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, May 20, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment | 20/05/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/4 and E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/cj635pr0753 | cj635pr0753_90210057.xml | GATT_155 | 1,326 | 8,732 | UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES . RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/4
AND ECONOMIQUE 20 May 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD
Fourth Meeting in Executive Session held
on Tuesday, 20 May 1947 at 10.30 a.m. at
the Palais des Nations, Geneva
Chairman: M. Max Suetens (Belgium)
The CHAIRMAN referred to the Report of the Charter Steering
Committee containing the proposed programme of meetings for
discussion of the Charter following 27 May (E/PC/T/72) and
requested Mr. HAWKINS, the Spokesman of the Charter Steering
Committee to introduce the Report for consideration. After
explanatory remarks by Mr. HAWKINS, Mr. GARCIA OLDINI (Chile)
expressed the view that excessive speed might prevent full
consideration of the many problems involved and might place an
undue strain on the smaller delegations. Accordingly, he
appealed for more elasticity in tha plan of meetings although
he had no specific proposal to make.
Dr. HOLLOWAY (South Africa) suggested the need for an
early discussion of Chapter II and particularly of the question
of relations between Members and non-members. He expressed the
opinion that this matter should be taken up at an early stage
in view of its bearing on the significance of so many parts
of the Charter. He, however, did not press for an earlier
date when the CHAIRMAN pointed our that consideration of
Article 36, which is concerned with the position of non-members
in relation to Members, was already planned for 5 and 6 June. E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/4
Page 2.
Mr. NASH (New Zealand) observed that it would be desirable
to allow sufficient altitude in the discussion of any Chapter
to enable reprsentatives to refer to related points in other
Chapters without going into the general subject of the other
Chapters, The CHAIRMAN agreed with the observation.
Mr. GOTZEN (Netherlands) enquired whether it might be
possible to sequence discussions before 27 May. The CHAIRMAN
explained that between now and 27 May the Committee would be
occupied with consideration of Chapter III, paragraph 2(c) of
Article 14, and the further consideration of the technical
articles.
The CHAIRMAN enquired whether the proposed program Was
acceptable to the Committee, in the light of the observations
made, on the understanding that the Stering Committee would
consult with Mr. GARCIA OLDINI (Chile) concerning the possible
introduction of greater elasticity into the programme.
There was no dissent.
The CHAIRMAN then indicated that the meeting was open for
the discussion of Chapter III, taking as a guide the Annotated
Agenda which had been prepared (E/PC/T/W.7/Rev.l). He expressed
his intention to apply to the discussion of this Chapter the
proposal made in the Report of the Steering Committee that, after
discussion in the- full Committee for the purpose of identifying
points at issue, unresolved questions would be referred to a same
sub-committee for further consideration.
The CHAIRMAN then invited Mr. Nash (New Zealand) to open
the discussion in view of the fact that Mr. Nash had taken such
an interest in the subject of this Chapter and that he expected
to be departing tomorrow. Mr. NASH (New Zealand) expressed hi,
preference to speak at the afternoon meeting. E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/4
Page 3.
The CHAIRMAN invited discussion on amendments of substance.
Article 3..
Mr. GUITTEREZ (Cuba) proposed to change the United States
amendment concerning the title of Article 3 to read "Production,
Demand and Employment." .
Mr. WILCOX (United States) stated that his Delegation did
not attach great importance to the order in which these three
words appeared in the titIe of Article 3, but it was important
that they should appear. Further more, his Delegation had no
objection te the word "'effective" being added to "'demand" at an
early point in the text.
The CHaiman proposed that discussion of- the title be post-
pened and then asked for the reaction of the meeting concerning
the additional paragraph proposed by the Delegation for CUBA.
Mr. tange (Australia) expressed the view that the present
paragraph giving precedence to employment" should be retained as
the first paragraph of Article 3. He added that he had no
objection to the adoption of paragraph (a) of the additional text
proposed by the Delegation for Cuba which might be incorporated
somewheree else in the text. But concerning the proposed sub-
paragraph (b) he felt that it might create some confusion and weaken
the responsibility of Member governments às indicated in Article 4.
Mr. WILCOX (United States) believed that the suggested wording
did not affect and was not intended to affect the responsibility
of governments as expressed in Article 4.
Dr. LOKANATHAN (India) expressed his preference for the
original language since the term "production" did appear not to
cover all "economic activities .
The representative for BELGIUM was not opposed to the adoption
of the sub-paragraph (a) of the Cuban proposal. He proposed that
economic developments be added at the end of the same paragraph. E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/4
Page 4
Concerning paragraph (b) of the Cuban proposal he shared the view
of the Australian Delegation.
Mr. WILSON (United Kingdom) supported the above remarks
by the representative for India. Mr. GUITTEREZ (Cuba)
explained that he did not intend to substitute his proposal
for the existing text but the additional t ext was int ended to
bring out the interdependence of employment, production and
demand. He drew the attention of the delegates to the words
"not exclusively" which he said covered the points brought up
by some of the delegates in regard to the effect of the proposed
additional text concerning the obligations of the governments
under Article 4. The CHAIRMAN referred the Cuban proposal
to the sub-committee.
Discussion then proceeded on the two amendments proposed
in paragraph 1 of -rticle 3 by the New Zealand and United States
delegations.
Mr. NASH (New Zealand) explained that his amendment was
intended to emphasize the importance of the rising standard of
living which should be considered the major purpose of the
Charter - the development of international trade, being not an
end in itself but a means towards the achievement of a better
standard of livin-.
This amendment was approved after the New Zealand
representative agreed to the inclusion of both words "all other".
Concerning the amendment proposed by the United States
Delegation, Mr. WILCOX (United States) expressed the view that
a reference to the achievement and maintenance of a high and
stable level of production would not detract from the emphasis
on employment, as it would be clear that the words "employment"
in this context could imply the conception of productive
employment.
Mr. WILSON (United Kingdom) stated that he did not hold very E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/4
page 5
strong views one way or the other on this proposal. The only
objection he had was that it appeared to him unnecessary, and
on balance the United Kingdom Delegation would prefer not to
include this proposal.
Mr. GOTZEN (Netherlands) stated that in general. he agreed
with the United States amendment, but he wished to draw the
attention of the sub-committee to the proposed teat which he
believed implied some slight contradiction inasmuch as it
refers to "high and stable" production but to "large and steadily
growing" demand.
Dr. LOKANAHAN (India) would agree to the inclusion of the
word "production", although he felt that demand was the main
factor, if the sub-¢ommittee could devise a text which would
relate "production" appropriately to "effective demand".
Mr. WILCOX (United States) suggested that the United
States amendment might be redrafted bg the sub-committee and
he flt that as long as the relation of demand, production and
employment was recognized, the precise wording could be left
to the sub-committee.
After several representatives had discussed the inclusion
ot the term effectivee demand", the representative for
CZECHOSLOVAKIA remarked that as no-one had indicated that the
retention of the term "effective demand" would be harmful,
he would suggest it be retained.
The Chairman concluded by stating that the United States
amendment would be referred to the sub-committee.
The meeting rose at 1 p.m. |
GATT Library | qz190dg7275 | Summary Record : Nineteenth Meeting in Executive Session Held on monday, 30 June 1947, at 2.30 p.m. in the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, July 10, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment | 10/07/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/19 and E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/qz190dg7275 | qz190dg7275_90210074.xml | GATT_155 | 112 | 888 | UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES
ECONOMIC CONSEIL RESTRICTED
AND ECONOMIQUE E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/19
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL 10 July 1947 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD
Nineteenth Meeting in Executive Session
Held on monday, 30 June 1947, at 2.30 p.m. in the
Palais des Nations, Geneva.
.
Chairman: M. Royer (France )
NINTH REPORT BY THE TARIFF NEGOTIATIONS WORKING PARTY.
The CHAIRMAN invited the Executive to approve the Ninth Report
f the Tariff Negotiations Working Party on the Progress of Tariff
egotiations ( document E/PC/T/107 of 24 June 1947). The Report was
approved without discussion.
The meeting closed at 2.40 p.m.
. |
GATT Library | fs575dg8723 | Summary Record : Ninth Meeting in Executive Session held on Friday, 23 May 1947 at 10.30 a.m. at the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, May 24, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment | 24/05/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/9 and E/PC/T/EC/SR. 2/1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/fs575dg8723 | fs575dg8723_90210062.xml | GATT_155 | 1,097 | 7,130 | RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/9.
AND ECONOMIQUE 24 May 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL
SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD
Ninth Meeting in Executive Session held on Friday,
23 May 1947 at 10.30 a.m. at the
Palais des Nations, Geneva
Chairman: M. Max Suetens (Belgium)
The CHAIRMAN referred to the need for the selection of
Vice-Chairmen to assist in conducting the meetings of the Com-
missions to be established for further consideration of the
draft Charter. He nominated Mr. COLBAN (Norway) as first Vice-
Chairman of Commission A. Mr. WILCOX (United States) nominated
the representative of Brazil (Mr. FERREIRA BRAGA) as the second
Vice-Chairman of that Commission. The nominations were approved
unanimously by the Committee.
The CHAIRMAN then referred to his proposed reply to the
Secretary of the Economic and Employment Commission in response
to an inquiry requesting the views of the Preparatory Committee
on the most appropriate form of international action to maintain
world full employment and economic stability (E/PC/T/Del 35).
The CHAIRMAN mentioned that this paper had been in the hands of
Delegations for some time and that, as no comments had been re-
ceived on it, he would propose to despatch the message immed-
iately in order that it might be received before the commencement
of the session of the Economic and Employment Commission on
June 2. Mr. HELMORE (United Kingdom) and Mr. GARCIA-OLDINI
UNITED NATIONS
NATIONS UNlES E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/9.
Page 2.
(Chile), without dissenting from the proposed reply, suggested
that in the future it would be appreciated if advance notice
could be given of the intention to consider an item in the Com-
mittee. The CHAIRMAN assured the meeting that, so far as
possible, advance notice would be given in the future, but in
this particular case, as it had been indicated in the paper that
the meeting of the Economic and Employment Commission was to
open within the next few days, the Committee would doubtless be
prepared to act on this matter at the present meeting. The
CHAIRMAN agreed to a suggestion made by Mr. HELMORE that the
references in the reply to certain sections of the Report of
the First Session should be broadened to cover other sections
which would also be of interest to the Economic and Employment
Commission. The despatch of the proposed reply was approved.
Article 6
The CHAIRMAN Invited discussion of the amendments which
had been proposed to Article 6 (E/PC/T/W.87, Rev. 1).
Following an explanation by Mr. PHILLIPS (Australia) of
the proposed Australian amendment, several Delegates spoke in
support of the general principle of that amendment. In support-
ing the substance of the amendment, M. NATHAN (France) Indicated
that some further changes might be required since the present
draft appeared to stress too much tbe bilateral aspect.
M. JUSSIANT (Belgium) also expressed the view that the amendment
should recognize that a disequilibrium in any country's balance
of payments has multilateral effects and should be met with a
multilateral solution. Dr. LOKANATHAN (India), While supporting
the amendment in substance, regretted the apparent implication
that a country with a balance of payments surplus is necessarily
at fault. Mr. WILCOX (United States) objected to the amendment E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/9.
Page 3.
as drafted and suggested that the language of the article should
be neutral as to the attribution of blame for the situation and
should require each member to make his appropriate contribution.
Mr. DEUTSCH (Canada) doubted that the persistence of a favour-
able balance of payments is necessarily harmful. He remarked
that the effect of such a favourable balance depends on whether
the existence of such a balance is accompanied by a suitable
programmed of international investment which might render its
effects generally beneficial. Mr. HELMORE (United Kingdom),
while agreeing with the idea behind the Australian amendment,
sympathized with the observations made by the representatives of
Canada and India and agreed with Mr. WILCOX that the article
should not presume to attribute blame to the creditor country
in every case. He proposed an amended version of the article
(see Document E/PC/T/W/111).
Mr. CHWANG (China) supported the United Kingdom proposal.
Mr. LUXFORD (International Bank for Reconstruction and Develop-
ment) expressed the agreement of the Bank and the Fund with the
apparent desire of the Australian amendment to ensure that
equilibrium in a country's balance of payments is achieved at
the highest possible level. He remarked that it would be wrong,
however, to imply that the country with a surplus is necessarily
at fault. He observed that for instance, the deficit experienced
by a country may be due to the limited range of products avail-
able in that country for export, and that similarly the surplus
accruing to another country may be due to the fact that import-
ing countries are pursuing inflationary policies. In such
hypothetical cases it might be improper to attribute blame one
way or another. Mr. WEBS (New Zealand) supported the Australian E/PC/T/EC/SR.2/9. Page 4.
amendment but suggested that the word "persistently" in the first
line of the present Australian draft might be deleted. Mr.
PHILLIPS (Australia) expressed the view that in the light of
the discussion a compromise should be possible. He pointed out,
in reply to the remarks of Mr.WILCOX, that the intention of the
Australian draft had not been to attribute blame but merely to
locate the source of the deficit without necessarily implying
any judgement concerning the intentions of that country. He
thought that the words "persistenly favourable" provided a
definition of the type of balance of payments situation which
was relevant. The article did not purport to cover all balance
of payments situations. In reply to M. NATHAN and M. JUSSIANT
he expressed the view that Article 26, paragraph 5, dealt
adequately with the multilateral aspects and doubted the wisdom
of amending the present article which was intended to deal with
a special case when the balance-of-payments position of a
narticular country happens to be exerting deflationary
pressure on other countries. At the suggestion of M. JUSSIANT,
M. NATHAN proposed an amended text (see document E/PC/T/W/115)
for consideration along with the proposals which others had
made.
Mr. FRESQUET (Cuba) indicated his support for the United
States amendment.
The CHAIRMAN announced that the discussion on this
article was now closed and the various amendments would be ref-
erred to the Ad Hoc Sub-committee which had previously been est-
ablished to consider Articles 3 - 5. He suggested that the Sub-
committee, which would be under the chairmanship of Dr.
LOKANATHAN, should consult with other Delegations which had
made proposals.
The meeting rose at 12.30 p.m. |
GATT Library | bp399pq2688 | Summary Record of Eighth Meeting : Held 7 February 1947 | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 10, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee, and Administrative Sub-Committee | 10/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/63 and E/PC/T/C.6/61-72 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bp399pq2688 | bp399pq2688_90230123.xml | GATT_155 | 846 | 5,520 | United Nations
Nations Unies RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/63
10 February 1
AND ECONOMIQUE
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENG
~~~- . p - ....' - :,..,......
EEAPTINTH COW Y; O T4B PEPAAORY COMfTT OF
='MPLO M NT C'1 - 7 MRAM AND E.K YIE M
-----STR= SUB-COMUMT-.
SUMAM MCOI) tOF3IGi METING.
Eelj 7 Fdbruar :1947
chci'an: Dr. Guillermo Alemilla
1. Papers Submitted
(an E/Pa/TwC.6/W.47/Corr.1 (iiform.l vorking paper)
(b) Secretariat draft of themmirst report of the Sub-cozrittee
(iaormal work-ng paper).
?47
MISH
2. Corrections
The Delegate of Brazil stated that the informal working paper
"Formula for Membership Proposed.b" the Brazilian Delegation! should be
corrected as followsg on page 3 the last para;raph should be eliminated
aud the whole of page 4 shoild likewise be eliminated.
The Belgian Delegate wished the record to show that Belgium favours
the formla tf three categories over .te ne of two categories.-Hexis of
the opinion that the grouginy of countries in cate6or, A, as contemplated
by the Sub-coitteed-rat, is of a nature more controversial than the one
proposed by the Belgian Delegation in the Bel6ian draft of Article 38.
3 K The Secretazy (Mr..origan) requested ma rulin- of the Sub-comittee
asmmto whether the Sub-cofittee would aapprove of shorter summry records
oAIRfA its meethngs; The CHMN, with tbe approval of the Sub-committee,
approved ehe pmmnciple of shant~r su Cary records &md left:it to the
ardsment bt min etretsy mo detertime.for.eaaych-eeting the -ecessr scope
many lemfthrdsthe siair. recof&t. : .
. -. . .. - - : - - .-- : . Upcn the questioning E/PC/T/C.6/63
Page 2
4. Upon the questioning of the CHAIRMAN, the Delegate of Brazil stated
that he would prefer to have the Brazilian draft of Article 68 submitted
to the Drafting Committee rather than have it discussed by the Sub-committee
and submitted to the Drafting Committee in an amended or altered form.
5. The Sub-committee debated the Secretariat draft of the "First Report
-te
of the Administrative Suommic2Ittee (Report on Executive Boared Mmbership
and Votin.)" I discussing this draft sentency b7 sentence the
Submconmittee decided upon a number of minor changes in furmilation. In
regard to conclusion number twp (Page 2 of the report) the Sub-momnittee
decided to expend this part of the report and to give a more detailed report
cf the reasoning underlying the geiGhting formula which had been selected
b- the Submmoznittee. In this respect the Subm-comittee instructed the
Delegate of aCanda to co-operate with the Secretary in working out a
oefcrmulation of thia pert of the report.
6. Debate on the Undtecngip.dom-United States-Canada redraft of Article 68
on the Basis of 2 and 3 Categories
The Submmcorittee discussed the redrawt uhich ad.been prepared by the
United Kingdom, United States and Canadian Delegates pursuant to the
instructions issuey b7 the Submmio= ttee in its SevenMe 1beting.
The Chilean Delegate directed the attention of the Sub-committee to
the fact that the first alternative of Article 68 in the London report
did not provide for an increase in thumb n=er of seats on the Executive
Board and hegguZGested to add to the first alternative as paragraph 5 the
foling-=S clause:
"The Conferencae myy b; the affirmative vooe bf two-thirds of its
Yambers present and voting, increase the membership to no more than 18,
mkgn appropriate provisions for continuity in accordance with.the
-enali1 intention of paragraph 3." . -
The Sub-comggttee discussed this su&gestion and after discussing the
difficulties which mi-ht arise if the first alternative of Article 68 in
the London Report were 'o be amended or changed, decided to abstain from any
/amendments E/PC/T/C.6/63
Page 3
amendments to the text of this alternative and merely to refer to this
question in its report.
The Sub-committee decided that the United States, United Kingdom,
Canadian redraft of Article 68 on the basis of two categories should be
designated as Alternative A, and the same redraft of Article 68 on the basis
of three categories should be designated as Alternative 3, and that the two
alternative drafts A and B, with a few minor changes and insertions, should
be recommended as replacement of the second, third and fourth alternatives
of Article 68 in the London Report.
In discussing paragraph 3 (a) of Alternative A, the Delegate of France
prefers a determination of economic importance based on three full calendar
years, similar to the provisions in paragraph 2, second paragraph of
Alternative B. He pointed out that there was no good reason why in the case
of one alternative, a three-year average should prevail and in the case of
Alternative A only a two-year average would obtain.
In regard to Alternative 3, paragraph 1, the Sub-committee decided to
refer to the Legal Drafting Sub-committee the question whether in paragraph 1
the words "Members of the Organization" would be preferable to simply
"Members".
The Secretary was instructed to prepare a revised redraft of the first
report of the Sub-committee as a regular working paper and to issue
Alternatives A and B with the changes decided upon as regular working
papers.
The Sub-committee was adjourned until Tuesday, 11 February 1947,
at 2:45 p.m. |
GATT Library | ts859xs9531 | Summary Record of Fifth Meeting : Held at the capitol, Havana, Cuba, Friday, 5 December 1947, at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 7, 1947 | Second Committee: Economic Development | 07/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.5 and E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.1-17 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ts859xs9531 | ts859xs9531_90180439.xml | GATT_155 | 2,349 | 15,539 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.5
ON DU 7 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH GLISH
SECOND CTEEEE: ECNOMIC DEVEL.OPMN
SWATH MEBTINAREORD OF FIFEDiG
Held at'71piolavana, Cuba, FridaDyce, 5 ember 1947, pat 4. 00 .m.
Chairman: Mr. Ramon BETETA (Mexico)
TAN he CHLQMriewed proposals -mae concerning the footnote to
Chapter III on reconstruction and suggested that discussson of they asrticle
be continued, keeping in mind in esach cae the questiwon of hether
development and reconstruction should be considered together.
Mr UEFRESQTa (Cu.) accepted this procedure.
t was agreed there would be no sub-commeittp -at oine at 'hise ;timnnd
hat the footnote.had been sufficiently disced. usstt was altaso Uen as
understood that no decision on the substance of the footnote had been taken.
ARTICLE 8 - .
Mr. LIEU (China) asked whether there might not be some misinterpretation
of the word coxovn`-ig Heed that there might be some danger:"to ser.
rights of countries by way of exploitation.
Mr. ENTEZA (Iran) 'lso felt some clarification should be made to avoid
thge possibility of exploita:tion. Mr. Lieusuaested an explanatory note
the termAcmgnointerest is not used ignn any sense derogatory to the sovereio
rights of any member".
Mr. COI (Australia) sugon"gested omission of the word: "commU
M . mon "M(Sgatwe also suggeste"d tmohe-deleion o the 7word- 'con"
and the addition of the words "for the interest of humanity at large".
Sim throughARAV Ceylo and Mr. AS tIZ g(Afghanistan)1'~ho'uht te
might obe some opening fr infringment of the sovereign rights of states in the
present wording of the text.
Mr. COOMBS (Australia) suggested as more p:referable wording "members
recognize that it is of in the interest allcountri'ses tahat the world humn
urcesand material re ehould be productively used".
Mr. New Zealand) felwts thereh ng in the ma tno to te iChaterprmt- -
one country to have access to another's materials without t thhe consentofe
latter counugtry. le Hoe tohoht detin" f the word common"shoeuld solve th
matter. E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.5
Page 2
Mr. SHACKLE (United Kingdom) thought the word "interest" had more
implication and suggested that the following words be substituted: "that the
productive use of the world's human and material resources will redound to
the benefit of all countries..." This change was supported by Mr. LIEU (China)
Mr. OLDINI (Chile) suggested that the United Kingdom proposal be
distributed. This suggestion was supported by Mr. ENTEZAN (Iran) who added
that a Drafting Sub-Committee should take note of this discussion.
Mr. NASH (New Zealand) pointed out that without impinging on sovereign
rights, it must be admitted that there was common interest in the resources
of the world.
Mr. LIEU (China) felt that inasmuch as the representative of New Zealand
at a previous meeting had suggested a form of trusteeship concerning some
resources, it was post important that the terminology of Article 8 should not
be ambiguous. He thought the idea of such a trusteeship was rather advanced
at the present time and that the matter should be referred to a sub-committee.
The CHAIRMAN proposed that in accordance with the Rules of Procedure
that the United Kingdom proposal be distributed and be referred to a
sub-committee comosed of the representatives of Australia, China and the
United Kingdom, for drafting changes.
The Committee agreed with this proposal.
ARTICLE 9
The amendment of the delegation of Ceylon proposed the deletion of the
word "progressively" in line 2 of Article 9.
Mr. RUBIN (United States of America) though not feeling strongly on the
point, thought that the word "progressively" should be retained.
Mr. MAHDEVA (Ceylon) author of the amendment did not insist strongly on
the deletion of the word "progressively". He said the proposal was merely a
drafting amendment.
It was AGREED to take note of this drafting change and to refer it to a
Drafting Committee.
Mr. BRIGNOLI (Argentina) called attention to the phrase "where necessary
to reconstruct" and stressed the difference between the first stage of
reconstruction of war-devastated countries and their economic development
through use of natural resources.
On the suggestion of Mr. d'ANNA (Italy), supported by Mr. KOJEVE (France),
it was agreed that this point fall within the decision concerning the question
of "development and reconstruction" and that the matter should be left until
the Committee had considered all the Articles in the Chapter.
ARTICLE 10 .
There being no comments on paragraph 1, the amendments to paragraph 2
submitted by Burma, Pakistan and Turkey were considered.
/Mr. KY E/CONF .2/C. 2/SR.5
Page 3
Mr. KYIN (Burma) stated that his proposal to substitute the word
"development" for "plans" in line 7 of paragraph 2 would permit the
Organization to sponsor preliminary surveys when called upon.
Mr. RUBIN (United States of America) said it had been contemplated that
preliminary planning of that type would have been accomplished by the countries
concerned, rather than that the Organization should formulate plans. His
delegation reserved its position, pending examination of the more comprehensive
amendments bearing on this point.
Mr. ARAUJO (Colombia) agreed with the representative of the United States.
His delegation had submitted a new Article under Chapter III which was intended
among other things to create organs for the purpose of undertaking technical
studied requested by member states.
Mr. ADARKAR (India) said he would welcome provision for special studies
and hoped that the paragraph would not be made restrictive.
Mr. COOMBS (Australia) saw no objection to the Burmese proposal: the
appropriate limitations were contained in paragraph 1 of Article 10.
Mr. OLDINI (Chile) wondered whether, if the Organization were empowered
to conduct preliminary surveys, it would be inclined to judge the plans of
member states. He felt that a state should formulate its plans and seek
technical assistance from the Organization only when it had insufficient means
to carry on with such plans.
Mr. K. OLSEN (Food and Agriculture Organization) emphasized the vital
interest of the FAO in any economic studies undertaken by a state or by the
Organization. The problem of food supply would not diminish. Population
growth, increased employment, and the readjustment of war-torn economies would
all prevent this.
The FAO at the request of governments sent missions to various countries
for general as well as specific problems. It was, in addition, operating
regional programme. In under conserve resources and to utilize them to the
fullest1 the FAO has taken the initiative in this type of study. A Specialized
Agency, like the FAO or the ITO could (i) make available the best talent; (ii)
act as brokers for securing technicians; (iii) act as technical consultants on
loans and, (iv) make available information of a technical nature.
He suggested that some countries, interested in huge programmes should
not overlook the advantages of a series of smaller projects.
The CHAIRMAN stated that Committee VI had appointed a sub-committee to
study the proposal of the delegate of Mexico that an Economic Development
Committee be established. Since paragraph 2 of Article 10 and amendments
thereto were directly related to that proposal, he suggested Committee II
appoint a like sub-committee to work with the sub-committee of Committee VI,
/and that such E/CONF. 2/C.2/SR.5
Page 4
and that such a sub-committee should consist of the representatives of Australia,
Belgium, China, Colombia, France, Pakistan, Mexico, Union of South Africa,
Turkey, United States of America and Venezuela.
Mr. OLDINI (Chile) felt that because of the inter-relation, such a
eub-committee was necessary, but in order to widen the scope of opinion, he
would suggest that members of delegations different from those represented
on Committee VI's sub-committee, be appointed.
Referring to the suggestion of Mr. LIEU (China) that those countries which
had made special amendments to Chapter III should also be represented on the
proposed sub-committee, Mr. WILGRESS (Canada) pointed out that full opportunity
was provided in the Rules of Procedure for the views of all countries to be
heard.
Mr. TINOCO (Costa Rica) stated that his delegation would present its views
in regard to the question of double taxation which fell within the field of
economic development.
Mr. OLDINI (Chile) said that the establishment of a sub-committee of
Committee II was indispensable. The terms of reference the envisaged
permanent Committee on Economic Development within the framework of the
Charter would have to be based on the work accomplished by Committee II. Only
five or six members would be necessary to serve as a liasion for information .g
or as a ggubidin ody to the sub-committee of Coemmitte VI. :.f
stThe CHA a atindg -tht h sdigedenisist on hiss ggepredoposal, -.ustd
that the following countries should form a sub-cmommitt IIe eeg. of Comittee,.
Burma, NewZealand. Canada, Uruguay Chil e and Sweden..In response to an
irve Mr. HnIDntioIraqn fro m"R ( ince latter countr y cwuded as also.inlqs
representing the interests of the Arab countries.
Mr. SY (Nhoogrway) tauh that ith sub-committee appointedi bye. CmmItt VI
was sufficient. If a new sub-committee were appointed, however, it should
s tudy carthedewors ri out already by oths er ohr ganof teUnited Nations, such
as that concerning doubile taxaton. Work on this probleem had ben started
by the Leaague of Ntions and the whole question of ecovenomic delopment was at
opresent being exatminedoboy he Ec nmic andSocial CIt oun cil. wasessential
tovo avoid e rlappingand c in tonfusionhis matter. -.. -. .;
MrHAEC:Md Kingdom) - supporte the views of the representative of
Australia, namelythata the sub-committee Apointed by Committee VI was-
impaant and. epresentative in compositione. Hginel supported ths rin4,
suggestion:-te Chairman.
SMr. sRoUBIN (Unitedtate f Americ a) suggested thattherespective
Chair men of Comittees-I and VI should consult togethemighr..Consultation t
also takeplace as to whether a further asub-cossamymit tee we necea orthe
bersadd titioAosMbr oe original sub-committees.
SS/Mr. WIs E/CONF. 2/C.2/SR.5
Page 5
Mr. WILGRESS (Canada) supported by Mr.ENTEZAN (Iran), thought that the
sub-committee of Committee VI had been given particular terms of reference
in relation to-the organizational side of economic development questions. He
suggested consultation between the Chairmen of Committees II and VI and the
creation of a joint sub-committee to report back to the two main Committees.
Committee II could then consider the fundamental aspects of the sub-committee
of Committee VI.
The CHAIRMAN, resuming the discussion, stated that there were three
proposals: (1) the original proposal for a sub-committee of Committee II
consisting of the same countries appointed by Committee VI; (2) the proposal
for a sub-committee of Committee II to be composed of six members, and in
which none of the, original countries were represented and (3) a proposal to
the effect that Chairmen of the respective main Committees should consult
together in order to see whether the sub-committee appointed by Committee VI
should act as a joint committee of both main Committees II and VI and report
to both Committees.
On a show of hands, the general consensus of opinion was in favour of
the third proposal.'-
Mr. TRABLOUSI (Syria) stressed the concern which all Middle-Eastern
countries felt in regard to economic development.
Mr. COOMBS (Australia) thought that the precise terms of reference of
the Joint sub-committee should be worked out in consultation between the
Chairmen of both-Committees. While Committee II dealt with the functions
of ITO in its relation to assistance in economic development, Committee VI
was concerned with certain phases of organization within the Organization
itself for carri ngout such functions.
Mr. OLDINI (Chile) thought that there should be no confusion regarding
the functions of theu sbo-cmmittee, whose activities had been outned liy bthe
representative of Mexico morning, and would obviously cover Cptha IerII
of the Charter. The adoption or rejection of amendments or changes made in
certain Articles would determine the scope of any Economic Development
Committee in the Organization.
MrR. UBIN (United States of America) suggested that in the consideration
of terms of reference, the proposal of the Norwegian delegation regarding the
activities of specialized agencies should be taken into account.
. MDArARKER (India) expressed the interest of his delegation in the
observations of the representative of FAO, of which the sub-committee to be
appointed should be asked to take cognizance.
h CHAeIRMANM then asked for comments on the amendment to paragraph 2 of
Article 10 submitted by the representative of Pakistan, namely to include
/the words E/CONF.2/C. 2/SR. 5
Page 6
the words "capital goods, equipment and materials" at the end of the paragraph.
Mr. HASNIE (Pakistan) stated that the amendment was intended to enlarge
the scope of co-operation and assistance which member nations might seek from
the Organization. He did not insist on the amendment but felt that the
Organization should consider the possibility of extending the scope of the
Article.
Mr. RUBIN (United States of America) thought that the point was covered
by Article 11 (1) and also by Article 10.
Mr. HASNIE (Pakistan) stated that he was referring to the obligation of
the Organization as distinct from the assistance to be given by member nations.
Article 10 laid down the scope of activities of the Organization while
Article 11 referred to the obligations of member governments. If no difference
existed between the duties of a member nation and the Organization, he was
prepared to withdraw his amendment.
Mr. DENEL (Turkey) referring to the amendment submitted by his delegation
to paragraph 2 of Article 10, stated that investments had been safeguarded in
the Charter without any means being provided for placing of capital in the
future. His delegation would be ready to accept an alternative wording for the
amendment which would provide more effective assistance to underdeveloped
countries. The amendment was submitted because the intervention of the
Organization would perhaps lend weight to requests for capital to the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
Mr. NOVOA (Mexico) supported the amendment because it was obvious that
any assistance in regard to Industrial or Economic Development would be useless
if not accompanied by adequate funds.
On the proposal of Mr. OLDINI (Chile) it was decided to defer discussion
of the Turkish amendment to Article 10 until the next meeting, the date of which
would be announced later. The CHAIRMAN suggested that no meeting of the
Committee would take place on Saturday, 6 December. This proposal was accepted
by the Committee.
The meeting rose at 7.30 p.m. |
GATT Library | bw844vx9905 | Summary record of Fourteenth Meeting of the Tariff Agreement Committee : Held on Tuesday, 9 September 1947. at 2.30 p.m at the Palais des Nations, Geneva | United Nations Economic and Social Council, September 9, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council | 09/09/1947 | official documents | E/PC/TAC/SR/14 and E/PC/T/TAC/SR/1-18 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bw844vx9905 | bw844vx9905_90060015.xml | GATT_155 | 795 | 5,459 | UNITED NATIONS
ECONOMIC CONSEIL RESTRICTED
AND ECONOMIQUE E/PC/TAC/SR/14
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL 9 September 1947
SUMMARY RECORD OF
FOURTEENTH MEETING OF THE TARIFF AGREEMENT COMMITTEE
HELD ON TUESDAY, 9 SEPTEMBER 1947. AT 2.30 p.m AT
THE PALAIS DES NATIONS, GENEVA.
Chairman: The Honourable L.D. WILGRESS.
Article XXV - Withholding or Withdrawal of Benefits.
Concerning the proposal of the Czechoslovakian
Delegation, Dr. AUGENTHALER (Czechoslovakia) indicated
that he would have no objection to the retention of the
word "government" rather than "state". With this
amendment the Czechoslovakian proposal was adopted.
Article XXVI - Modification of Schedules.
M. ROYER (France) indicated that the French trans-
lation of the words "which has not become or has ceased
to be a contracting party" would have to be corrected.
Mr. SHACKLE (United Kingdom) withdrew his suggestion to
substitute the word "vary" for "modify".
M. ROYER remarked that the French equivalent of
"schedule" should be "liste" and not "bareme".
With the approval of the Committee the CHAIRMAN
indicated that the Tariff Negotiations Working Party
would present proposals for the establishment of a Legal
Drafting Committee.
Concerning the Czechoslovakian and United Kingdom
proposals relating to the mention of a date the Committee
agreed to insert the words "on or after January 1 1951".
NATIONS UNIES E/PC/TAC/SR/14
Page 2
Concerning the Czechoslovakian suggestion to delete
the words"..... and subject to consultation with the other
contracting parties which the Committee determines have a
substantial interest in the product concerned......", it
was observed that the present Article deferred from Article
XXV and that an amendment which might be proper in Article XXV
might not be appropriate in the present Article. Dr. COOMBS
(Australia) and Mr. FORTHOMME (Belgium) felt that the words
"which the Committee determines" should be retained.
The CHAIRMAN suggested that, in the light of the
discussion, the text should stand in its present form.
With respect to the Australian proposal in Document
E/PC/W/326, the Australian representative pointed out that the
proposal was designed to introduce some flexibility into the
Agreement following the lapse of the first three years in order
to permit a modification in individual items without
encouraging the withdrawal of a contracting party desiring to
make such modifications.
Mr. ADARKAR (India) indicated that he would not be opposed
to the proposal if it were understood that the procedure of
Article XXVI would apply whether the modifications of schedules
were desired for purposes of economic development or for any
other purpose.
After considerable discussion during which Mr. Melander
(Norway) and Dr. Augenthaler (Czechoslovakia) expressed their
support for the proposal and Mr. Forthorne (Belgium) expressed
his opposition, it was agreed that a sub-committee should be
established to give further consideration to the Australian
proposal. Representatives of the following D'elegations were
appointed to the sub-committee: Australia , Belgium Czecho-
slovakia, France, India, Norway and the United States, and the
representative of India was designated Chairman. E/PC/TAC/SR/14
Page 3
During the discussion a considerable degree of agreement was
reached on a proposal by Mr. LEDDY (United States) that a provision
be added to the existing text to the effect that in the negotiations
an endeavour should be made to maintain a general level of mutually
advantageous concessions which would not, on the whole, be less
favourable to trade than those provided for in the Agreement, and that,
if agreement cannot be reached the country desiring to withdraw an item
from the Agreement may do so and the other country may suspend
equivalent concessions.
Aricle XXVII- Amendments.
The Committee adopted the United Kingdom proposal that paragraph
1 should become an article by itself entitled "Suspension and Super-
session" and the remaining paragraphs should constitute a new article
entitled "Amendments". Consequently, in the second line of paragraph
2, after the words "provisions of this Article" the words "or of
Article XXVII" were added.
On the amendment proposed by the Australian Delegation in
Document E/PC/W/323 Mr. OLDINI (Chile), Mr. ADARKAR (India) and Mr.
JABBARA (Syria) expressed their disinclination to accept the amendment
since it might complicate the supersession of the provisions in the
General Agreement by the provisions of the final Charter. Mr. Royer
supported the Australian proposal as representing a realistic solution.
During the course of the discussion Mr. WEBB (New Zealand)
remarked on the absence of any provision for an Organization or
Secretariat. The Chairman pointed out that when the Secretary-General
convened a meeting of the Contracting Parties arrangements could be
made for such Organization and Secretariat as seemed necessary during
the short period in which the Contracting Parties would have to
operate before the ITO came into being.
On the suggestion of the Chairman further consideration of the
first paragraph of Article XXVII was deferred until the Australian
Delegation could submit a draft revised in the light of the discussion.
The meeting rose at 6.25 p.m. |
GATT Library | ng190hf9791 | Summary Record of Fourth Plenary Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, on 27 November 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 27, 1947 | 27/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/SR.4 and E/CONF.2/SR.1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ng190hf9791 | ng190hf9791_90180128.xml | GATT_155 | 4,309 | 28,349 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/SR.4
ON DU 27 November 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SUMMARY RECORD OF FOURTH PLENARY MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana,
on 27 November 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
The CHAIRMAN opened the meeting and called upon the. delegate of Denmark
to speak.
Mr. WAERUM (Denmark) recalled that during the inter-war period all
countries had endeavoured through measures regulating foreign trade to
safeguard their own economies without thinking of world economy as an entity.
As a.result, the volume of foreign trade had been diminished, and in a
majority of countries productivity and the standard of living had decreased.
The agreement on the International Monetary Fund and the International
Bank had been a first step towards the establishment of more stable conditions.
These measures were in themselves insufficient and would require to be
supplemented by measures to ensure a freer exchange of goods .
Before the first world war the gold standard dominated international
payments, and was a useful instrument in the economic conditions which
prevailed at that time.
As a result of the war, world economy had been dislocated. European
productivity had declined in a number of fields, thereby causing the
competitive power of Europe to diminish.
The first condition for useful application of the rules which were now
going to be laid down for trade and employment was the repair of the damage
caused. Not until this had been realized and productivity increased would
conditions exist for the full operation of the Charter. It would have been
edsirable if th eCharter had been divided into two parts, one comprising the
basic principles and the permanent exceptions, and one comprising the rules
applying to the period of reconstruction - the transitional measures. It
was too late to introduce this idea.
The Conference should direct its efforts towards the laying down of a
polioy for trade and employment, thereby making it possible to establsih a
freer exohange of goods among countries with wall balanced economy. It
was not quite clear whether this balance could be realized. The great
development that had taken place in certain countries since the first world
war in the technicaI and organizational fields might make it difficult to
/re-establish the Page 2
re-establish the free world trade of pre-war times.
This has to a certain extent been taken into consideration, for instance,
in the chapter on Industrial Development, which allows economically
undeveloped countries to apply certain protective measures to enable them to
become capable of competing with more highly developed countries. It was
of great importance that well-developed countries should not be allowed to
make use of the same provisions.
A provision of far-reaching importance laid dow in the Charter was that
each country should be obliged to maintain full and productive employment at
home. This, too, was something new. It was not sufficient to lay downesto,
certain rulesa frefoexchange of goodsei exwchange of goods;so to eit asi necessary al stablsh
napproe rulesi~s fort ofhte oe rules, and in case ofbservance.p hces
ideeead ut n them?entf!-iwou be. diult them.to apply. !
Thhee eisis sa ti c"leart,d " w"re toda%thairireclearsPnd',v y4 s a
it shatWfed;hct ooro n6 miclon aaas'fr pltical onrw eheasipkstQ s
despreadtuoemployment hadbta 0eOavoided. On ootsowhe,Qhander.t was noth, i
posyet sibol?forae wht problems mihavghto be t eed in fhe fieldsac t
mmerc;il 6=ericyand currency policy as a consequence of lis,l employmntuec
In some cnoriutesu flemplol eny mtwould bring autba tendency o towards a
rise in wag, eswhich might make it difficu ltfor ha ttcountrto comyetemp on
an ualefootiptng wi tohcuntries where wages werless liablee to rise.
T Dzhish aonGrnveemnt swa dissep odpotsvily tieowardsh te imptorant
proposals which were to be discussed, forenmarkmh,d alw aays followed a
icralisticellintin therco mmercial polciy ,cdnianishDw coeeomy was highly;
ndeetnon f fpeign tade. Only if foreig twadenwerr e px aned,could cote. epuld
Denmark mainhtain its d oh ig st.andarfliving
e i Iortant thjatthe organization should t'world wide one.nous ta d-
s cBuut itf tmhioldnlo ime dciaetey, it was imperative for beahived Denmnrk
nohe llita tiito trade on a non-disctie rty` ionatory bnsiswithan.
cnont-meber.uiries.
-pad ahe thervibutatoy omabloe, wk he PredQratory. Committeeney itbr
lishinin bg D afteCharter,arterosss han uhre,.te etiongthe .sqncfre ite1
h the Da pof dYlsheeoog to ca-tphiati ive the oanenh. ofth Conference. e 9p
(Fr4 uller text see Press Rele?).ase IT
Takihtan) dicldrcc~thcse his cuu ro asntsoated hc.Jseleri
thwthe efforts to ? up ans International Trade Organization under htef
which could only be entained if the nations set themselves wholeheartedlyof
tto h task, appreciated the e difficulties of one another and concededw at h
uld be done to ? our fuligations osa embers of the ?cof natoins.ul
akistan was E/CONF. 2/SR .4
Page 3
Pakistan was primarily an agricultural country and produced some of
the most important basic raw materials such as cotten and jute. She had an
of unsurveyed and untapped mineral wealth. Her primary need was
to industrialize as quickly as possible in order to attain a balanced
economy, by reducing the pressure on land, giving employment to millions.
and raising the existing low standard of living of her masses.
The need for industrialization would make heavy demands on her revenues.
It would be unwise to mortgage the resources of the country and think in
terms of highly advanced countries. To say that the undeveloped countries
could adopt a different line of action than that which the industrialized
countries had followed in the past, was to deny to them the benefit of age
long experience and to force them to perform new experiments which might
prove to be hazardous and costly.
While paying a tribute to the work done by the Preparatory Committee
at Geneva, he felt that due attention had not been paid to the requirements
of undeveloped and under-developed countries. These countries required
positive assistance and a more liberal treatment than that accorded to them
in the Draft Charter. In return, such countries would naturally be prepared
to encourage the flow of foreign capital and. importation of talent to the
maximum extent consistent with the declared policy of their governments.
The prerequisite of such encouragement was the grant of reasonable
facilities and adequate. security.
Unless effective steps were taken to ensure the availability of funds
in the currency required, international trade was likely to be hampered.
Multilateral convertibility of various currencies was the beat means of
providing access to the cheapest market. This was primarily a matter for
the International Monetary Fund and the Interational Trade Organization
would no: doubt endeavour to seek this objective through the good offices
of the Fund.
One of the most important operative parts of the Draft Charter was
that which related to the expansion of international trade by the extension
of the "most favoured nation" treatment by members to one another without
distinction, and the elimination of preferences and reduction of tariffs.
Pakistan had taken part in the trade negotiations which had been conducted
at Geneva and had signed the general agreement on trade and tariffs drawn
up by the participating coiuntries, subject to the formal approval of her
Legislature.
He emphasized that Pakistan came into existence barely two and one half
months before the act was signed by her representative. When negotiations
were under way at Geneva, British India was still undivided. Even at
present Pakistan felt considerably handicapped in examining effects of the
/Agreement on her ?
Agreement on her economy. Nevertheless in the belief that their interests
would not go by defaults and that their desire to offer fullest co-operation
in the international field was met, they had signed the Agreement.
The Pakistan delegation felt that this Draft Charter must, in parts,
be substantially amended to give full weight in unambiguous language to the
views of the undeveloped and under-developed countries which comprised an
overwhelming majority of the peoples of the world to whose welfare the
Organization was pledged. (For fuller text see Press Release ITO/44).
Mr. RACZKOWSKI (Poland) in pointing out that Poland had not taken part
in the preparation of the Draft Charter reserved, for the time being, the
attitude of his delegation which had some serious doubts.with regard to
this draft. This did not mean that Poland considered a major part of its
provisions as unacceptable. Since the liberation Poland was engaged in
applying an economic policy, the main objectives of which were full employment
the raising of the standard of life, and the expansion of world trade.
Poland had often been accused of being against multilateral trade, and
constantly reminded that its trade agreements with foreign countries were
almost exclusively of a bilateral type. While admitting that this
the case, he explained that this was because of the difficult situation
after the war, partly due to the particular structure of Poland's foreign
trade but mostly due to the unstable monetary situation .in Europe. His
country was turning gradually towards a more liberal form permitting a
certain degree of free transfer of exchange. He thought that the principle
of non-discriminatory treatment of all members of the Organization could be
applied only 'when economical conditions could warrant such equality. In
the last few decades, however, the trend of the economics of different
countries had not been toward equalization, in fact, quite the reverse.
The last war, with its terrific destruction, had accentuated these
differences. After the war, differences in the economic situation of
different states, and. in the standards of life of their citizens has become
bigger than ever before. In such circumstances, the applications of the
principle of non-discrimination to international trade without reference
to the different level of economic development seemed to be ?
difficult and would remain difficult for years to come.
While the Draft Charter provided for a transitory pe periandd
included special provisions, it seemed rsthate ooitps austitho wert otimic
in evaluating the length of time needed to improionve this situat
ah.stxtiay Te emperince of the Bret aton mWno ohdsmd bn.n gedt!olWe
borne in, mind,. Thoen the restration of the co nvertitionpljmability oa
currencies had been expected to come mtucnh s ooner ha itnow seemed
probable. Similar mistakes in respTOPect to the Chd bearter shoul
avoided, he cautioned. In view of the actual economic situation of the E/CONF.2/SR.4
Page 5
world he thought it might perhaps be better to postpone the introduction of
permanent rules governing-International trade. If, however, some international
agreement on trade was considered essential, the basis for such an agreement
should be the reverse of what had been accepted by the authors of the
Draft Charter.
The exceptions should constitute the core of the Draft Charter, and
provisions should become gradually more liberal as the economic condition
of the world improved. Such an approach to the problem would be more
realistic and would be more easily acceptable to many countries. He also
referred to the inter-relation between employment and international trade on
one hand, and international financial and investment policy on the other.
At Bretton Woods it had been said that no international equilibrium could be
reached in the field of money and finances without the proper solution of
the problems of employment and trade. Today, this argument could be
reversed, particularly with respect to the war devastated or the undeveloped
countries. While they could increase their share through their own effort,
their task could be shortened and facilitated by help from abroad. In the
war devastated areas, even limited importations, especially of capital goods,
could contribute to the elimination of economic bottlenecks, to an increase
of production, an improved standard of living of the population and an
increase in foreign trade.
As an example he cited the Polish coal production which could be
substantially increased by importing a certain amount of mining equipment
which Poland did not produce. The Polish food production too could be
increased if fertilizers, draft power, and agricultural machinery could be
imported. Unfortunately, Poland could not afford such importatione and as
a result, Polish production was developing more slowly than necessary. This
situation he ascribed to the fact that for political reasons, Poland like
.certain other countries was subjected to some kind of credit blockade on the
part of national investment capital.
The flow of capital goods was based mainly on political and not on
economic. considerations. This flow was being directed mainly towards
comparatively wealthy countries, while others, devastated during the war,
through no fault of their own, or undeveloped, were left without help.
Firstly, such an investment policy would deepen the economic inequalities
discussed a while ago, and secondly, it would force all countries which are
denied outside help to rely on bilateral agreements so as to safeguard their
balance of payments. It. was a hard necessity into which a poor country was
forced when it was unable to obtain free exchange. through. some international
credit arrangements. The result of the present investment policy was nothing
less than undermining the foundations of the Charter, thus making general
/introduction of Page 6
introduction of multilateral trade a very remote possibility.
Poland was now a war devastated country with the huge task of
reconstruction and striving hard to develop its resources. The Polish
delegation, therefore, would watch the discussions regarding the Charter,
from those two points of view. Poland was very much interested in all
aspects of international trade and its development, the more so since
international trade was of greater importance to the new Poland, than to the
old. She was now the greatest exporter of coal in-Europe, and exported an
ever growing variety of other goods. Poland had entered into trade relations
with nearly all European and numerous countries overseas aid had steadily
developed and enlarged her commercial relations. As soon as agricultural -
production was restored to a more normal level, Poland would resume its
traditional export of foodstuffs, thus further increasing its share in
international trade. (For fuller text see Press Release ITO/39).
Mr. SAHLIN (Sweden) explained that Sweden had not participated in the
preparatory work fr the drafting of the Charter but had followed this work
with intense interest.
The objectives of the Conference were in harmony with the general lines
of economic policy which Sweden had tried to follow. Sweden was in a high
degree dependent upon her foreign trade, and it was definitely in Sweden's
interest that the same conditions of multilateralism should prevail for
world trade.
In drafting the Charter attention had been drawn to the risk that
countries being subject to deflationary tendencies might restrict their
imports and thereby provoke a shrinking of world trade. Developments lately
had proved the existence of the opposite risk, namely of inflationary
tendencies upsetting the balance of payments and leading to import restriction
Steps would have to be taken to reduce the acute tensions prevailing
between different markets In the case of Sweden, events had shown the
difficulties arising out of the existing post-war economic and political
conditions. Before the war Swedish foreign trade and shipping had had their
main source of income in Europe and the wider sterling area. These conditions
had changed. On the one hand, Europe and the sterling area had declined
considerably in importance as sources of supply; on the other hand, it was
no longer possible to use the proceeds from exports and shipping derived
from Sweden's traditional markets in Europe and elsewhere to pay for an
import surplus from hard currency countries. Sweden was forced to import
goods from the hard currency area to a. much larger extent than before and
had been compelled to base her commercial and economic policies for the
present on the assumption that Sweden would have to balance its payments
with hard-currency countries. /The objective of E/CONF .2/SR. 4
Page 7
The objective of multilateral trade should not be lost sight of even
if, for a transitional period, bilateral arrangements on quotas etc. might
prove valuable. During the last years such arrangements had no doubt
contributed to. the revival of international trade on a larger scale than
conditions would otherwise have allowed. Such bilateral agreements had
created new possibilities of trade, thus indirectly furthering the general
objectives of the Charter.
It had been hoped that the period of. post-war reconstruction would be
comparatively short and that it would soon be possible to revert to the
relative. freedom of interchange prevailing in pre-war days. It had now
become apparent, however, that the reconstruction period would be of much
longer duration than had been expected. It could be questioned whether.
the present time was suitable for precipitating a solution of this complex
.problem.. If the problems were not tackled now, however, grave inconveniences
would arise. During the later stages of the preparatory work, special
attention had been given to the conditions of the transitional period. The
inclusion of the transitional clauses had, however, made it possible to
paye the way for immediate practical solutions.
Certain clauses of the Charter provided exceptions for meeting the
special interests of certain groups of countries, in order to ensure the
participation of the largest possible number of countries. It was of
importance that the organization should be commonly adhered to.The
relations between Member and non-Member states had not beep defined in the
Draft Charter and would be discussed at this Conference. It was urgent
that the Charter should not contain provisions obligating members to
discriminate against such states and that each Member should retain his
liberty of action should the organization not become universal.
His delegation would raise a point he said, concerning the Swedish
Government's long-range policy with regard to agricultural production
aiming at securing for the rural population of the country the same social
and economic standards as other population groups now enjoyed. A policy
of this character was in harmony with the general objectives of the
United Nations. Charter, and would be more fully explained in Committee.
(For fuller text see Press Release ITO/35)
Mr. CLAYTON (United States of America) saw reasons for encouragement
in the field of economic relations. despite obstacles everywhere and
pointed to the establishment of a basis for lasting international
co-operation in food and agriculture and in money and finance. He praised
the notable accomplishments of the Preparatory Committee at London and
Geneva leading up to this Conference, and the General Agreement on Tariffs
and. Trade negotiated at Geneva.
/The Draft Charter, E/CONF.2/SR.4
Page 8
The Draft Charter, designed to provide a common code of conduct in
international trade, was the key stone in the basic structure of co-operation
and discussion in international economic relationships. Without it,
nationalism would rule in the economic and political world, shattering our
hopes for a prosperous and peaceful world. Between world wars I and II,
nations had acted unilaterally in international economic affairs. Such
action would benefit a nation only until other nations took similar action.
In the end, all countries had been hurt and embittered.
He stressed that increased production was the most pressing eonomfo
problem now confronting the world, since there were not enough commodities
available. Some day surpluse would again have to be faced. Under the
system of international division of labour on which our modern society
rested, individual nations produced of some things much more than they could
consume and of other things less than they required. Under a proper system
of exchange the world should have no surplus problems. Despite the
.pre-occupation with the problems of production and of aid for the restoration
of war shattered economies a charter for organizing the world effectively
for international economic go-operation was urgently needed, as otherwise
all efforts would prove futile; restored productivity would again bring
unmarketable surpluses and starvation prices; any aid provided would be a
palliative.: ;.:
The Charter was a vital part of the plan for a dikind of worldfferent
with the purpose of so organizing international tr bringaade tasto bou a
great. increase in the. production, distribution and consumptioon of gods
throughout the world. This would mean, of course, the soundme d evelopntof
the rgurces of. the world and' he acceleration of industriali.zation; Te
United States had repeatedly demonstrated its bel ief inthis policy through
the extension of credits, technical assistance and ostherwi e, anedits bst
customers had always been the developed countries linceke Fra, the
United Kingdom,a and Cnada. : .''. ,
Heec insisted that onomic development coulsafely andd only proceed
profitabaly through the dopcttionmm suof negative andconstruiveeares
restrictive me faasures would bets,al. Nenvertheletes s dthe Uited Staha
gone far to meet opposing points of view. c mThemise as resulting opro
conta ined inCapter.3of the Draft Char tergeater permeasuamittedi'ga a of
restrictionism than he believed to be wise. Buthe woaaccs prepared t ept it,
if general agreement would therebybe obtained. . -
The Charter e- attconomic he maintyenance of. inernal edn=militg'p
it recognized tat trade should bei'reer than it was today. that 1 should be
mlaltilaatter3, ther thann biteril;m tit it shld be 'on-dscriinatory.
/The Charter rovided E/CONF.2/SR.4
Page 9
The Charter provided also that cartels should be prevented from operating
to restrict and limit international trade, and the United States was in full
agreement with all these matters.
None of these things were possible if nations were to retain unbridled
freedom to place restrictions on their trade. Nor should the Charter be
overloaded with a multiplicity of exceptions and escape clauses. A
charter in which the basic provisions of commercial policy were materially
diluted could not be accepted by the United States.
The representative character of the Preparatory Committee should have
been ample guarantee that the Draft was not confined to the needs and
interests of any small group of states. On the contrary it was designed
to meet the needs of all nations.
This was not to say, however, that the Draft Charter was sacrosanct
or. that there was no room for improvement in detail. However, before
insisting upon amendments, those countries which had not been members of ..
the Preparatory Committee should examine very closely the provisions they
were inclined to question, and satisfy themselves that their objections had
not already been seen and exhaustively considered in the formulation of
this draft.
He moreover asked those countries that were members of the Committee to
re-examine any reservations that they might have attached to particular
points in the draft and to withdraw them wherever they could.
He was confident of maintaining at this meeting the spirit of
understanding and co-operation which had characterized the meetings of the
Preparatory Committee, and of bringing the work here to an early and a
successful conclusion.
The decisions taken in Havana would certainly fix the pattern of
international trade for many years to come. There were only two roads open
to the world, one leading to multilateral, non-discriminatory trade with a.
great increase in the production, distribution and consumption of goods and
happier relatio ships between all countries; the other leading to economic
nationalism, bilateralism, discriminatory practices, a lowering of the
standard of living and bad feeling all around. It was up to this Conference
to choose which road to take.
.Mr. DE MOYA (Dominican Republic) emphasized the desire of his delegation
to co-operate in achieving the principles embodied in the Draft Charter,
and to take part generally in international co-operation, in order to help
to erase the difficulties which had arisen as a result of the war. The
problems before the Trade and Employment Conference were, so to speak,
nuclear matters around which all the international organizations would
gyrate. If the work of the Conference were successful, the political aspects
/of the work E/CONF.2/SR.4
Page 10
of the work of the United Nations would be facilitated.
The greatest need, however, was for reciprocity. The Draft Charter
did not appear to be acceptable because it did not offer an equitable
solution within the disequilibrium which was acknowledged to exist between
the different countries. Moreover, it merely made abstract declarations
of principle with regard to economic development. Those who had come to
the Conference had done so in order to establish the bases of an organization
to regulate national economies, with a full awareness of the sacrifices
this implied. It was necessary to give, before receiving, and a helping
hand would have to be extended to all nations to aid them in the achievement
of a higher standard of living. This was the spirit which must animate
the Conference, in order to prevent its breaking down through the pursuit
of self-interest as other Conferences had. International commerce had
to be organized on a just and equitable basis. It was a matter of vital.
economic importance to raise the standard of living of all peoples, and he
was sure that the efforts of the Conference would be blessed by Providence.
The aim of the Draft Charter was to fulfil these aims and bridge the
fundamental differences between the nations. Certain countries were more
backward and needed more assistance. All could not be measured with the
same yardstick. He would not enlarge upon this theme, which had been
amply developed by previous speakers, but it brought him to the problem
of customs tariffs.
The Dominican Republic had been described as the Cinderella of the
Caribbean. She had few natural resources, and entered the world of
commerce on the lowest rung of the ladder. Only the spirit of self-
sacrifice of her people, under the wise guidance of her Government, had
enabled her to arrive at her present position. She did not enjoy preferential
treatment or quotas, and she had had to beg from door to door to sell her
products. The Draft Charter should be so framed as not to discriminate
against particular countries or to crystallize the faits accomplis which
had developed during the last few years. His country had: reduced. her
customs tariffs as a step towards the fulfilment of the Charter;;-::= -
He concluded by paying a tribu-te to the work of the Preparatory;-^
Commission in drawing up the Draft Charter, and expressed faith in the
achievements of the present Conference. - |
|
GATT Library | bb225nc1987 | Summary Record of Meeting (III.a) : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba Friday, 19 December 1947, at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 20, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 20/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.15 and E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bb225nc1987 | bb225nc1987_90190236.xml | GATT_155 | 2,162 | 14,392 | United Nations Nations Unies E/C0NF.2,/C.3/SR.15
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 20 December l947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUMMARY RECORD OF MEETING (III,a)
Held at the Capitol, Havena, Cuba
Friday, 19 December 1947, at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. L. D. WIRGRESS (Canada)
1. COMPOSITION OF J0INT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES II AND III
The CHAIRMAN stated that as a result of discussion in Committee Il,
the composition of the joint sub-committee of Committees II and III was
proposed as follows: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile,
El Salvador, France, Iran, Poland, Sweden, Syria, United Kingdom,
United States, Venezuela.
Mr. GARCIA-OLDINI (Chile) felt that the list did not reflect the
division of opinion expressed in Committee; in addition to the so-called
neutrals, there should be at least equal representation of majority and,
minority opinions.
Mr. ATAMAN (Turkey) agreed with the representative of Chile and
suggested adding Afghanistan and Greece.
Mr. LEDDY (United States of America), supported by Mr. GUERRA (Cuba),
suggested the total be increased to sixteen and the views evenly distributed,
Mr. DOMOND (Haiti), supported by Mr. PEREZ (Dominican Republic),
requested membership on the joint sub-committee because of the special
position of their countries, He pointed out that several members listed
in Annex A were proposed as members of the joint sub-committee.
The CHAIRMAN stated he would take the discussion Into account and
would consult again with the Chairman of Committee II. In making the
selection suggested, it had not been attempted to reflect the exact
division of opinion, but rather to take account of divergent views together
with broad geographical distribution. It would not be possible to have
every interested Member represented, but those who had submitted amendments
or proposals would be given opportunity be heard by the joint sub-
committee.
/2. SUB-COMMITTE A E/CONF.2/C 3/SR .15
Page 2
2. SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
It was agreed that the delegation of Brazil should be represented on
Sub-Committee A when discussing Articles 18 and 19.
3. NEW PROPOSAL TO ARTICLE 16.
It was agreed that the proposal of the delegation of Czechoelovakia
relative to Article 16, paragraph 4, be referred to the Joint sub-committee
of Committees II and III.
4. ARTICLE 32 (FIRST READING)
It was agreed that the information to be received relating to existing
conventions on transit would be referred to the sub-conmittee which 'would
study Article 32.
Paragraph 1
Mr. PELLIZA (Argentina) stated that his country did not discriminate
in respect of shipping, but wished to reserve its right to grant advantages,
not harmful to others, to promote national enterprises; the amendments
(Items 2, 4) were submitted for that purpose. The establishment of rigid
rules in the Charter for international transit was to be questioned; the
problem could best be dealt with by the forthcoming International Maritime
Conference.
Mr. AZIZ (Afghanistan) explained that the addition of the words
"assembling and die-assembling" (Item 3) was intended to cover goods
difficult to transport.
Mr. HASNIE (Pakistan) while in sympathy with the amendment, wanted
a clear definition of the words; processing should not be included.
Mr. AZIZ (Afghanistan) replied that the amendment had in mind vehicles
and machines: the sole purpose was to facilitate transport of goods
destined for Afghanistan.
Mr. LAMSVELT (Netherlands) was not of the opinion that general articles
on transport were out of place in a Trade Charter. But the Convention of
Barcelona was affected by the Article as drafted and the Conference would
have to decide which 'provisions were preferable.
Mr. AZIZ (Afghanistan) felt that if international free trade was desired,
all exceptions to free transit should be avoided.
Mr. GARCIA-OLDINI (Chile) stated that his amendment (Item 5) did not
restrict the present text of paragraph 2 but would allow members to reach
agreement as to the provisions of Article 32 among themselves.
Paragraphs 3 and 4: no comments.
Paragraph
Mr. BENES (Czechoslovakia) attached the greatest importance to the
/footnote E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.15
Page 3
footnote to paragraph 5 and wished it to be maintained.
Mr. LAMSVELT (Netherlands) asked that the note be deleted: Belgium,
Luxembourg and the Netherlands did not want discriminatory traffic charges
re-established on routes to German ports. The words "on the same route"
would allow such discrimination. It was an oversight that the Netherlands
had previously made no reservation on this paragraph.
Mr. SUETENS (Belgium) agreed with the statement of the representative
of the Netherlands.
Paragraph 6
Mr. LECUYER (France) stated that France for many years had had a special
surtay on products of non-European countries entering France from non-French
ports. It was hoped that future negotiation would bring about their
elimination but during the transition period of reestablishment and
development of ports they were a necessary measure; his amendment (Item 7)
acknowledged that situation.
Mr. MORTON (Australia) could not see why, for the purpose stated, the
clause in paragraph 6, so necessary to everyone party to a preferential
system, should be deleted.
Mr. LEDDY (United States of America) asked whether the French amendment
would authorize a country to deny most-favoured-nation treatment under
Article 16 (1) on goods clearly originating in another member country, but
in transit through a country not entitled to most-favoured-nation treatment.
Mr. LECUYER (France) replied that it was not a tariff but a surtax
added to the normal tariff and did not therefore come under Article 16.
Mr. SUETENS (Belgium) expressed his regret that the French amendment
had been introduced. Be hoped that, should France consider re-establishment
of that surtax, she would enter into negotiations with Belgium and the
Netherlands.
Mr. LAMVELT (Netherlands) agreed with the statement of the representative
representative of Belgium and added that if there was any deletion In
paragraph 6, he would prefer deletion of the whole of the second sentence,
Paragraph 7: no comment.
New Paragraph
Mr. DJEBZARA (Syria) stated that the Afghanistan amendment (Item 9)
would provide certain exceptions to the proposed new paragraph submitted
by the delegation of Costa Rica (Item 8) so that seasonal movement would
not subject livestock to customs duties.
Mr. TINCCO (Costa Rica) stated that livestock in transit to
Costa Rican ports used pasturage for which a small tax was levied; his
/amendment E/CONF.2/C .3 /SR.15
Pdge 4
amendment was submitted to allow the continuance of that practice,
It was agreed to submit all proposals end amendments to Article 32
to th.p sub-conmittee studying that Article.
5.. ARTICLE 35 (FIRST READING)
Paragraph 1
Mr. ATAMAN (Turkey) believed the present text did not intend to exclude
charges other than for services rendered. However, If this was the purpose,
he must insist on the amendment: Turkey had other charges which would be
difficult administratively to consider as internal taxes.
Mr. PELLIZA (Argentina) said that the drafting change (Item 38)
proposed using the word "dues" to clarify the Spanish text.
Mr. FERRERO (Peru) supported the Turkish amendment.
Paragraph 4: no comments.
Paragraph 5
Mr. GONZALEZ (Uruguay) stated that his amendment (Item 42) would.
facilitate the established practice of temporary commercial interchange
of advertising commercial travellers and samples.
Mr. WASHINGTON (Brazil) stated that if the substance of the footnote
to Article 35 of the Draft Charter was retained (Item 44) and It was
understood that charges in foreign exchange were subject to decisions of
the International Monetary Fund, his delegation would withdraw its
reservation (Item 47). Brazil had its particular problem before the Fund
and would accept the Fund's decisions.
Mr. GARCIA-OLDINI (Chile) observed a difference in the French, English
and Spanish text of the footnote and requested that this be called to the
attention of the Ceneral Comittee.
New Paragraph
Mr. GONZALEZ (Uruguay) stated that the proposed new paragraph to
Article 35 (Item 45) was submitted to recognize the principle that when
an offence was no more than administrative, the incident should end,
without further consequences, with the payment by the offender of the
appropriate duties, and fines. -
Mr. HOLLOWAY (Union of South Africa) felt that the proposal went too
far . Under it the fact that similar offences had been committed previously,
could not be taken into account.
Mr. CORIAI (Venezuela) pointed out that in the English text of the
amiendment submitted by Uruguay (Item 45) the word "surcharges" should
correctly read "fines".
/Mr. AZIZ E/CONF.2/0.3/SR.?
Page 5
Mr. AZIZ (Afghanistan) explained that his delegations amendment
(Item 46) was designed to assure freedom of international transit
particularly for countries without access to the sea.
Mr. HASNIE (Pakistan) fully agreed with the intention underlying the
Afghanistan amendment but thought such questions were better amicably
settled between tha two neighbouring countries concerned without the
intervention of the Organization. Furthermore, free zones raised
political as well as economic issues.
It was agreed to refer all amendments to Article 35 to the Sub-Committee.
6. ARTICLE 36 - FIRST READING
Mr. PELLIZA (Argentina) pointed to an error in the Argentine amendment
(Item 48) as contained in the Revised Annotated Agenda. It was proposed
to delete not the whole of Article 36, but only paragraph 7; he was now
satisfied to support the Chilean amendment instead of insisting on the
Argentine proposal.
Mr. GARCIA-OLDINI (Chile) thought that the draft text was too nebulous
ana unclear; the Chilean amendment (Item 49) would make it more precise
and serve the real purpose of the Article.
Mr. LECUYER (France) emphasized the importance of marks of origin for
his country. The Chilean amendment seemed to him much narrower than the
original text with which everybody could have agreed.
Mr. GARCIA-OLDINI (Chile) observed that the proposed amendment only
stated more honestly and clearly whatt the aim of the procedure was wiithout
covering up with words the lack of substance. If a product was properly
labelled, the ultimate purchaser could not be deceived..Onthe other hand,
certain generic names were in universal usage not for geographical reasons
but rather because of a similarity or identity of the manufacturing
processes involved.
Mr. PILLIZA (Argentina) explained that in his country the phrase
"Made In Argentina" was obligatory for all products produced there.;
Deception in retard to the country of origin was. impcssible in
countries which were enforcing legislation such as envisaged by the Chilean
amendment. It was agreed to refer all amendments to Article 36,. including
the Cuban amendnent (Item 3 of document E/CONF.2/C.3/6) to the sub-Committee.
7. ARTICLE 37 (FIRST READING)
Mr. SEIDENFADEN (Denmark) inquired whether presentation of a bill in
Parliament could be considered as publication within the meaning of
paragraph 2; he wished to have it confirmed that this was the opinion of
the Conference. Mr. LEDDY (United States of America) and the CHAIRMAN
/believed E/C0NF.2/C.3/SR.15
Page 6
believed that that interpretation was correct.
Mr. PELLIZA (Argentina) said, in commenting on the Argentina proposal
for deletion of the last part of paragraph 3 (c) (Item 50), that it was
difficult to determine the degree of objectivity and impartiality of an
administrative procedure. It rested more on good faith than on
institutions; and since the standards of Article 37 had been fully defined,
the deletion proposed by him would allow the Organization to proceed with
greater freedom of action.
Mr. BAHGAT (Egypt) reported the procedures enforced by his country
with reference to paragraph 3 (a) and (b) and inquired whether they could
be considered adequate, The CHAIRMAN suggested that the Sub-Committes
examine the matter, to which the Committee agreed.
It ia agreed to refer all amendment to Article 37 to the Sub-Conmittee.
8. ARTICLE 38 (FIRST READING)
Mr. MELANDER (Norway) observed that his amendment (Item 53) was of a
technical nature and designed to prevent overlapping of information between
the Organization and other agencies of the United Nations. It was agreed
to refer all amendments to Article 38 to the Sub-Comlittee.
The CHAIRMAN drew attention to the Report of the Council of the
International Chamber of Commerce (document E/CONF.2/8), which on pages
24 and 25 contained suggestions regarding Articles 35, 36, 37, and 38,
which the Sub-committee would wish to consider.
9. ARTICLE 39 (FIRST READING)
Mr. HAKIM (Lebanon) stated that the amendment submitted jointly by
the delegations of Lebanon and Syria (Item 54) would be presented in
Sub-Committee In a somewhat modified form.
Mr. LEDDY (United States of America) remarked that the original draft
of the Article had been weakened to such an extent that the Sub-ComMittee
might conider the possibility of deleting the Article entirely. It was
ageed to refer Article 39 with all amendments to the Sub-Committee.
10. APPOINTMENT OF SUB-COMMITTEE
The CHAIRMAN then proposed, as Members of the Sub-Cormittee on Section E
of Chapter IV, the representatives of Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia,
Canada, Cuba, France, Lebanon, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan,
Portugal, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay.
This was agreed to. The CRAIRMAN having obtained agreement for the Sub-
Committee to meet simultaneously with the Sub-Committee studying Articles 16
to 19, announced that its first meeting would be held on Monday,
22 December 1947. Committee III-a would also meet again on Monday,
22 December 1947, at 4.00 pm. to discuss Section F, Special Provisions,
Articles 40 to 43.
The meeting rose at 6.50 p.m. |
GATT Library | cg342vr4133 | Summary Record of Second Meeting : Corrigendum to Summary Record of Second Meeting (Document E/PC/T/C.6/46) | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 11, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee, and Sub-Committee on Tariff Negotiations | 11/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/46/Corr.1 and E/PC/T/C.6/37-55 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/cg342vr4133 | cg342vr4133_90230096.xml | GATT_155 | 94 | 661 | United Nations
ECONOMIC
AND
SOCIAL COUNCIL
Nations Unies
CONSEIL
ECONOMIQUE
ET SOCIAL
RESTRICTED
E/PC/T/C. 6/46/
Corr. 1
11 February 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE ON TARIFF NEGOTIATIONS
SUMMARY RECORD OF SECOND MEETING
CORRIGENDUM TO SUMMARY RECORD OF SECOND MEETING
(DOCUMENT E/PC/T/C.6/46)
Page 2
The second paragraph in the discussion of Article 30 should read:
."It was agreed to incorporate paragraph 1 in the General
Agreement, and to refer the rest of this Article for a later
consideration of the Drafting Committee." |
GATT Library | xd724cd4346 | Summary Record of Second Meeting Held 23 January 1947 at 2:45 p.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, January 23, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee, and Sub-Committee on Voting and Executive Board Membership | 23/01/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/11 and E/PC/T/C.6/1-20 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xd724cd4346 | xd724cd4346_90230039.xml | GATT_155 | 1,244 | 8,203 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL . E/PCT/C.6/11
AND ECONOMIQUE 23 January 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREAPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE ON VOTML AND EXECUTIVE BOARD
MEMBERSHIP
Summary Record of Second Meeting Held' 23 January 1947
at 2:45 p.m.
After the opening of the meeting by the Chairman Mr. Alsmills,
the Sub-Committes discussed: -
o1.- The U Inited Kindm propose. the dformula for weighteavoting
(E/PTUTH AFRI6/NW.3).. The SOu .CA Delegate expressed the opinion that
the basia vote should be smaller. For example, twenty instead.of the
RAZILIANpresenHILEAN The HAND C.rrEANXDelegates stated. that they were
unable to duKpogd the UniteE Xind-om pnoposal because i their opinion
factors (mb) and: (d).,. naely, those concernieg national incom, have no
sigsificance at it iompmpossible to cCC:are. neierogeneous quastlties.
in theEIGIAN on of the strIJs Delegate, altesb should be laid on the
*olume of international trade and ncome an national iroe and population.
The CUBAN Delegate. objected to the United Kingdom drafton the basis
that the data (1937) was not up to date and that new data should be
csecured.. In.bs-mpacit y as Chanirzan BEKGUABhe'alled o. the Zand
Uh=-i }DCM o co-operate in issuing a more up-to-date
fdrft., The Secretary assued. themm Cmittee that the co-operation of
the Statistical Depmartent of the SecretariatuldUd. be secured for
this work.
2. Discussion of thugg S§estion by the Uenitd. tStaes fWeightedowr
ingVo= (EC/T/C.6 . )W6
The Delegate of the United States (Mr. LdyDe) gave a short
/exanplation E/PC/T/C .6/11
Page 2
explanation of the United States suggestions. They provide for a
system of weighted voting only on questions where ITO has to consult
the International Monetary Fund, namely on balance of payments
questions. The Fund may authorize exchange restrictions for balance
of peyments considerations, and ITO may authorize quantitative
restrictions for the sane reasons. It is therefore suggested that
in these matters there should be weighted voting on the Executive
Board of ITO similar to that of the Fund. On other questions there
would be equal voting in ITO. It is also necessary to co-ordinate the
voting procedures of the Executive Board with those of the ITO
Conference, because during the times the Conference f.s not in
session, the executive Board assumes the functions of the Conference.
In order to assure rotation, the election of members to the Executive
Board of ITO should be done in the same way as the elections to the
Executive Board of the Fund. To the CHAIRMAN's question as to which
Body elects the new Members the UNITED STATES Delegate (Mr. Kellogg)
answered that it is the Conference.' The Executive Board may
recommend new Members but the decision lies definitely with the
Conference.
The Delegate for FRANCEstated that he did not see any objection
to the fact that the same problem should be treated differently in
the Fund and in ITO; on the contrary, if the sane voting procedure
is employed this presupposes the same membership in both Organizations.
The CHILIEAN Delegate expressed the same opinion and the CHAIRMAN
asked. the UNITED STATES Delegation to further elaborate and clarify
their proposal in time for the next meeting.
The Delegate for BRAZIL stated that he was unable to support the
United States suggetion for the following reasons:
1. .on a question of substance like this, he did not think
that the same method of weighted voting applies;
/2. the ITO E /PC/T/C.6/11
Page 3
2. the ITO articles, refer not only to the Fund but to
other Inter-governmental agencies and therefore there is
no special reason to use the Fund's weighting system. as
'a model.
The UNITED STATES Delegate (Mr. Leddy) replied that the terms of
reference of the Drafting Committee call for submitting a text for
weighted voting to the Second Session at Geneva and that this is the reason
for the United States suggestions.
The SECRETARY (Mr. Lacarte) suggested that the formulas for
weighted voting should be referred to Geneva as the minority view, and
included in the Report of the Drafting Committee..
3. The Cairman's Proposals (à titre personnel) on. Voting
The CHAIRMAN said that he had worked out a rotating schema which
would. take into account both political and Geographical representation.
The Executive Board would be composed of fourteen members. Of these
there would be five permanent members, (presumably the United States,
United Kingdom, France, China, India) and three groups of four members
each. Within each group three out of four members would be on the
Board at one time; that is, only one year out of four is one member of
the group out of office.
The-three groups are
Group I Group II . Group III
Canada Belgium- - Brazil
Australia .Netherlands Chile
South Africa. Czechoslovagda - Cuba
New Zealand Norway Lebanon
Each group has three seats and the countries - -hn each would be
grouped according to geographical considerations.
If new country entered end if it were of similar economic
Importance, the appropriate group would be enlarged. to five members
and would have four seats. The problem of weighted voting would thus
/be avoided E/PC/T/C.6/11
be avoided and the permanence. or. somi-permanence of. the countries of
chief economic importance. of the Executive and, assured.
To the SECRETARY'S question- how would permanent members be
.selected the CHAIRMAN answered that this would be done according to.
-economic Importance.
4. Canadian Suggestions
It was. agreed to. postpone the discussion of the Canadan
suggestion until the arrival of the Canadian alternate.
5. Discussion of the Secretariat's Draft of Article 68
The CHAIRMAN asked the members of the sub-committee to express
their views on the following question: should the permanent members. on
the -Executive Board have the right to vote for the other members?
CUBA, SOUTH AFRICA and. GREAT BRITAIN answered in the negative. BRAZIL
and CHILE were not prepared. to answer.
The UNITED STATES Delegate pointed out that the five permanent.
members would in all probability not cast their votes in the same
way and that therefore he would not voice an opposition against
their voting. However he had no strong feelings on the subject.
The FRENCH and BELGIAN Delegates concurred in this opinion.
The CHAIRMAN asked the delegates of Chie and. Brazil to express
en opinion without committing themselves, and. asked the Secretariat
to draft with the help of Mr. Kellogg a. text in the negative, namely
that permnent members should not vote..
The Committee then discussed paragraph -2 of Article 68 namely
the determination of Members which are of ."chief economic importance'.
The I.L.O. representative was asked what the provisions of the
I.L.0. on this subject were. Mr.RICHES . stated that in practice the
question of the determination of the countries of chief economic .
importance is not dealt with unless a country re-opens it. He
recalled two instance when this happened, In 1934 when Canada bad to
give wau to. India as a permanent member of the Governing Body, and in
/1939 E/PC/T/C. 6/11
Page 5
1939, when the question of replacing the U.S.S.R. came up. He stated
that the question will be dealt with at the next meeting, of the
Governing:ody in March.
The Committee then discussed whether "not less than five years"
should be replaced by "as the occasion arises."
The Secretariat was requested to submit a new draft of Articie 68
to the next meeting.
The meeting rose at 5:00 p.m. and the Chairman fixed the date of the
meeting to Monday, 27 January, 2:45 p.m.
next |
GATT Library | vf661gn6145 | Summary Record of Second Meeting : Held at Lake Success on 6 February, 1947. at 2:45 p.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 6, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee, and Sub-Committee on Tariff Negotiations | 06/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/46 and E/PC/T/C.6/37-55 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/vf661gn6145 | vf661gn6145_90230095.xml | GATT_155 | 688 | 4,576 | United Nations
Nations Unies
ECONOMIC CONSEIL
AND ECONOMIQUE 6 February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE
OF THE INTENATIONAL CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE ON TARIFF NEGOTIATIONS,
SUMMARY RECORD OF SECOND MEETING
Held at Lake Success on 6 February, 1947. at 2:45 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. B. N. ADARKAR
The CHAIRMAN introduced the Draft Report of the Technical Sub-Committee
(E/PC/T/C.6/55) on Articles 15-23 and 37 and suggested that the Sub-Committee
will consider, at a later stage, to what extent these Articles should be
incorporated in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
Article 24
The CHAIRMAN pointed out that the countries represented on the
Preparatory Comittee will have fulfilled their obligations under this article
when the General Agreement will come into force. Consequently these
obligations will arise only with regard to countries wishing to enter into
negotiations at a later stage, but before the Charter will come into force,
which procedure was permissible. It was, therefore, felt that the provisions
of this Article should be included in an appropriate form in the General
Agreement.
Articles 25-29
The CHAIRMAN suggested that the whole of the Section on Quantitative
Restrictions and Exchange Control should be included in the General Agreement.
Mr. MA (China) informed the Chairman that he had no instructions from
his Government and, therefore, wished to reserve this question for a decision
of his Government.
Answering a question from Mr. MA, the CHAIRMAN pointed out that it was
/understood E/PC/T/C . 6/46
Page 2
understood that if a certain Article was incorporated in any form in the
General Agreement, all reservations made by Delegates were automatically
included.
Mr. BAYER (Czechoslovakia) considered it necessary to incorporate the
full text of the Charter in the General Agreement s ince almost every Article'
had some bearing upon the tariff negotiations and. in view of the fact that the
Agreement will be probably still in fore after the Charter had been ratified.
The CHAIRMAN raised the question if Non-Members of the International
Monetary Fund should enter into a special exchange agreement, as provided
for in Article 29, simultaniously with their joining the General Agreement.
It was felt that an undertaking to enter into a special exchange agreement
would be sufficient.
The Sub-Committee decided that Section C of Chapter V should be
incorporated in an appropriate form in the General Agreement.
Article 2.3
In connection with Article 25, M. LECUYFR (France) drew attention to
the importance of Article 13 and it was agreed that this Article would be
included in an appropriate form in the General Agreement. The Sub-Committee
wished, however, to review this decision after consideration of the whole
of Chapter V of the Charter.
Article 30
Mr. LEDDY (United States) was in favour of incorporating the first
paragraph in the General Agreement. Concerning the rest of this Article,
he pointed. out that the executive authority of his Government did not
permit an undertaking with regard to export subsidies.
It was agreed to incorporate paragraph 1 in the General Agreement and
to refer the rest of this Article for further consideration at the Second
Session of the Preparatory Committee.
Articles 31-33
The general sense of the discussion was that Article 31, paragraph 1 (b)
/and paragraph E/PC/T/C. 6/46
Page 3
and paragraph 2 of -Article 32, should be incorporated in an appropriate
form in the General Agreement. The inclusion of Article 33 would be
considered if and when a country with a complete state monopoly of import
trade entered into the General Agreement.
Articles 34-35
The Sub-Committee was of the opinion that these Articles should be
incorporated in an appropriate form in the General Agreement.
Article 36
Since this Article was referred to the Second Session of the
Preparatory Committee, no decision was taken on the incorporation in the
General Agreement,
Article 37
This Article will be considered after the Technical Sub-Committee has
completed its report.
Article 39
It was decided to incorporate this Article in en appropriate
form in the General Agreement.
The Sub-Committee discussed provisionally the tentative suggestion
made by the United Kingdom Delegation (E/PC/T/C.6/W.40 ).
Next Meeting: on Monday at 2:45 p.m. |
GATT Library | th909dk3831 | Summary Record of Second Plenary Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, on 22 November 1947 at 12.30 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 22, 1947 | 22/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/SR.2 and E/CONF.2/SR.1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/th909dk3831 | th909dk3831_90180125.xml | GATT_155 | 127 | 856 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
UNRESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/SR.2
DU 22 November 1947
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SUMMARY RECORD OF SECOND PLENARY MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, on 22 November 1947
at 12.30 P.M.
Dr. GONZALEZ MUNOZ (Cuba), Temporary Chairman, declared the
meeting opened and asked for nominations for Chairman.
Mr. SUETENS (Belgium) proposed Mr. Serio I. Clark (Cuba) for
that office.
Dr. DON CESAR CHARLONE (Uruguay) seconded Mr. Suetens' proposal
to nominate Mr. Clark as Chairman.
Mr. CLARK (Cuba) was elected Chairman by acclamation.
Mr. MUNOZ (Cuba) asked Mr. Clark to take the chair.
Mr. CLARK (Cuba) thanked the representatives, both on behalf of
himself and his country, for the honour conferred upon him.
The meeting rose at 1 p.m. |
|
GATT Library | qy449ck6198 | Summary Record of Seventh Meeting : Held on Tuesday, 4 February 1947 at 2:45 p.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 7, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee, and Administrative Sub-Committee | 07/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/56 and E/PC/T/C.6/55-60 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/qy449ck6198 | qy449ck6198_90230112.xml | GATT_155 | 1,460 | 9,677 | United Nations Nations Unies
ECONOMIC CONSEIL RESTRICTED
AND ECONOMIQUE E/PC/T/C.6/56
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL 7 February ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Summary Record of Seventh Meeting
ADMINISTRATIVE SUB-COMMITTEE
Held on Tuesday, 4 February 1947 at 2:45 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. Guillermo Alamilla
1Discussion of Article 68. Alternative Draft on the Basis of
Paragraph 1. The Committee discussed the draft of Article 63
on the basis of two categories of Board Membership. The Delegate of
CB referred to difficulties which might arise from abstentions
of voting in the Conference, and the Committee, after debate of the
issue, agreed that abstontions should not be taken into account.
The Committee approved Paragraph 1 with a numbor of minor
drafting amendments.
Paragraph 2. The Delegate of the ra&iiS raised the
question of the Zuration of the appointment of permanent Members
and the Chairman explained that replacement of Members of chief
economic importance may take place in any one year on the basis of
the determination procedure formulated in Paragraph 2. The Committee ttee
edappi-oraphgrafa with uma nabe of minor fdragitiamendmentsnC ~n-
raphParea. Thommitteee Ca=ebated. he difficulties in
cbtaignind aequatea stticstiaal dta in the first drmietenation of
eomoncc importance. A number offDelatesegreiter ted.gumeae,ts
which had been advanced weviouslwy ith garerd to :
the difficulty of obtaining statistical data in garder to
,atio/nnal E/PC/T/C.6/56
Page 2
national income. The Committee finally agreed to use the average of the
Figures for 1937 and of the last year immediately preceding the first
election and also concurred in the opinion that for the second election the
average of 1947 and 1943 figures could be considered if for any country no
adequate data should be available for the year 1946. The Committee approved
Paragraph 3 with these qualifications' nt-oas.
H AFRICAN The SO'Jlegate pointed out that in the sta.tstical table3
eiorabyted Ithe Secreta riat: old exports had not been incluaded e- that
the table should be accordingly corrected.
graph2araThbsia xggra~a wa-sap -roed by the Sub-Committeec;it the
Sub-Committee clarified that with regard to advisers, mentionet in this
Paragraph, it should be left to the rules of procedure of the Executive
Board to define their exact position on the Executive Board.
2, Discussion of Article 6C, Alternate Draft on the Basis of Three
Categories.
Paragraphs (a) and (b) were provisonally approved with Minor amendments.
With regard to Paragraph (c), the Sub-Committee discussed the question whether
this paragraph provided a sould mathematical formula for rotation especially
with regard to ccuntries who would lose their place in one category after a
Short period, especially whether a ratio of six to six to six for each
category would be preferasble to a ratio of seven to five to six in taking
account of problems which might arise when countries transfer from one
category into another category. The Committee decided to retain the original
distribution of seats with seven in the first, five in the second and six
in the third category.
Sub-paragraphs (b), (c), (d) and (e). The following text of paragraph
(b) was approved:
"The seven Members with the highest rating as determined every
/three years E/PC/T/C.6/56
Page 3
three years in accordance with the provisions of sub-peragraph (a)
above shall have seats on the Executive Board for the next three-year
period".
The UNTED KINGDOM Delegate proposed the following formulation for
sub-paragraph (c):
"The Conference, excluding the seventeen Members referred to above
under sub-paragraphs (b) and (c), shall elect one additional Member of
the Board for every three Members participating in the election under
this sub-paragraph, provided that such additional seats shall never
exceed six."
The Sub-Committee appointed an ad hoc drafting, group consisting of the
Delegates from CANADA, UNITED STATES and UNITED KINGDOM to elaborate in
co-operation with the Secretar. a new text of the alternative draft Article 68
based upon divided seats into three categories. Paragraph (c) of the new
draft is to be based on the UNITED KINGDOM formula and the draft should.
include provisions for the first election in conformance with those decided
upon by the Sub-Committee in the "two category draft", and the general rule
of non-eligibility for immediate re-election.
3. Weighted. Voting.
The UNITED KINGDOM Delegate explained that her country would prefer an
alternative which combines weighted voting on the basis of the UNITED KINGDOM DOM
formula vth a small number of pearmanent sets on the Executive Board.
KTNhe T2 = Delegate also expressed that UNITED KINGDOMthe M D OM
preferred weighted voting in the Conference whereas the Executive Board
Should arive at its decisions on the basis of "one vote - one country".
mThe Sub-Cciteewhe debated iier, in nycase of aereighted voting, the
total voytes of an country should have to be used in one single bloc or
whether they could be split uup. Tmhe Sb-Comittee decided that in the
eightedcee bvei'ng, all votes of any Member should have to be used in
ag sinle :_c.
/in discussion In discussing the basic vote of 100 used in the UNITED KINGDOM formula
for weighted, voting, three principle opinions were advancesm. one -group
of countries especially FRANCE and the UNITED STATES were of the opinion
that any basic vote would tend to underrate the real differences in the
other economic factors used in the weighted formula. If weighted voting
is to be considered , it should be basad on the real significance of economic
differences. CANADA held that a basic vote of 100 was much too high but
that a certain basic vote should be retained.
The NETHERLANDS Delegate explained that the quasi-Judicial nature of
the International Trade Organization should exclude weighted voting in the
Conference because the power of the economically most important countries to
out-vote the rest of the countries in addition to their permanent seats on
the Executive Board would render the Organization completely undemocretic
and would arouse Justified resentment on the part of the economically less
important countries. If any weighted voting should be envisaged it should
be in terms of a very high basic vote such as proposed in the UNITED KINGDOM
The UNITED STATES Delegate observed that the Sub-Committes was obviously;
so strongly eplit on the issue of the high or low basic vote in the case of
wighted voting, that, no purpose could. be served by further debate in the
Sub-Committee. He, therefore, proposed, and the Sub-Committee agreed. to
transfer the debate on weighted voting to the Drafting Committee, The
Sub-Committee also agreed that in presenting its findings to the Drafting
Committee, the first alternative of Article 68 in the London draft should be
presented, as the first alternative, then in sequence, the various
alternatives elaborated and approved by the Sub-Committee.
The Delegate of BRAZIL inquired whether the Brazilian draft of Article 68
should, be resported out as a Sub-Committee draft, and tbe Chairman ruled that
/it would. E/PC/T/C .6/56
Page 5
it would have to be debated and carried by a majority of the Sub-Committee to
be reported out as a Sub-Committee draft.
A debate ensued whether Delegates should be entitled to submit their
own drafts to the Drafting Committee under all circumstances also if they
were agreed on compromise formulas worked out by the Sub-Committee. The
Secretary ( Mr. Korican) suggested as a solution that it should be understood
that Members of the Sub-Committee could endorse compromise formulas,
elaborated by the Sub-Committee, in their quality as experts and Members of
the Sub-Committee without prejudice to their right to submit different
individual drafts on behalf of their governments.
The BELGIAN Delegate expressed his readiness to withdraw the BELGIAN
draft of Article 68 (E/PC/T/C .6,/W.48) provided "the three catsgories
formula" were to be adopted and no other Member of the Sub-Committee would
submit indiviual drafts.The BRAZILIAN Delegate wished the record to show
that BRAZIL originalIy had understood that their draft was to go to the
Drafting Committoe as a Sub-Committee proposal regardless of discussion
and approval in the Sub-Committee, and that he wished to reserve his final
decision on the BRAZILIAN draft pending receipt of instructions from the
senior Delegate of BRAZIL .
The Sub-Committee agreed that no compromise draft on weighted voting
should be elaborated end submitted to the Drafting Committee and that the
UNITED KINGDOM should submit its formula for weighted voting to the
Drafting Committee as her individual draft.
The CHAIRMAN stated for the record that the correct name of the
Sub-Committee is Administrative Sub-Committee end not Sub-Committee on
Executive Board Membership and Voting.
The Sub-Committee adjourned for Fridey, 7 February 1947 at 2:45 p.m.,
and it was agreed that the agenda of the next meeting should be devoted to
a further debate on weighted voting and to consider Article 72 (f.f.) of
the Charter. The CHAIRMAN asked the Delegates to submit their draft
proposals for Article 75. |
GATT Library | zk707vn7770 | Summary Record of the Eighteenth Meeting 10 February 1947 | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 10, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 10/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/64 and E/PC/T/C.6/61-72 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zk707vn7770 | zk707vn7770_90230124.xml | GATT_155 | 2,397 | 15,459 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/64
AND ECONOMIQUE 10 February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE EIGHTEENTH MEETING.
10 February 1947
Chairman: Mr. ADARKAR (India)
1. Papers Submitted
The CHAIRMAN introduced the folowing papers:
(a) E/PC/T/C.6/W.48. United States tentative draft of the general
agreement on Tariffs and Trade which was referred to the Sub-Committee
on Tariff Negotiations.
(b) White Paper of the United Kingdom Delegation (6 February)
on Articles 16 and 25 which was referred to the Technical Sub-Committee
to be considered in conjunction with Articles 21 and 27.
(d) White Paper of the ad hoc Sub-Committee on Article 52.
2. Article 52
Mr. ALAMILLA explained the considerations which lead the ad hoc
Sub-Committee to make certain changes in the wording of paragraphs 1 and 2 of
.Article 52. He also stated that the Chilean proposal (document E/PC/T/C.6/W.42
was discussed at length and the conclusion reached was that insofar as the
hardships referred to in the Chilean text were due to under employment the
point raised by the Chilean Delegation wlas covered by the present wording of
paragraph 2 of Article 52, which includes the Words "or under-employment"
after the word "unemployment".
To the CHAIRMAN's question as to whether he was satisfied with the
conclusions of the ad hoc Sub-COmmittee, the Delegate of Chile answered in
the affirmative on condition that both the text of the Chilean Delegation
and the explanations given by the ad hoc Sub Committee be included in the
Report.
/The Committee E/PC/T/C.6/64
Page 2
The Committee passed then to the discussion of Chapter VIII of the
London Charter.
3. Article 61
After the CHAIRMAN read the particle, the Delegate for SOUTH AFRICA
pointed out the necessity for a drafting change: the words "It shall be
the function of the Organization" should precede paragraph 1 because they
apply to the whole of Article 61. The Committee agreed, and referred the
problem to the Legal Drafting Sub-Committee. To the CHILEAN Delegate's
query as to whether the words "international organizations" in paragraph 2
included private international organizations, the CHAIRMAN and the
UNITED STATES Delegate answered that they referred only to inter-governmental
organizations.
The UNITED STATES Delegate was of the opinion that certain parts of
Article 61 stated on a general way what has already been stated specifically
in the other Chapters. He was therefore of the opinion that all of
paragraphs 2 and 3 could be suppressed, and the introductory part of the
Article might read: "In addition to the functions provided for in other
parts of the Charter, the Organization shall have the following functions:"
The FRENCH Delegate referred to an amendment to Article 8 proposed by
the FRENCH Delegation and asked that this should be considered in connection
with the discussion of Article 61.
The Delegate of CUBA moved to defer discussion of Article 61 and the
Delegate of CANADA suggested that the Administrative Sub-Committee's draft
of Article 1 (E/PC/T/C.6/31) should be considered in discussing Article 61.
4. Article 62
The Committee approved the London draft of Article 62.
5. Article 63
Paragraph 2. The Delegate of NEW ZEALAND suggested the deletion of the
word "advisers" in this paragraph because such a reference was unnecessary.
When the Delegates of the UNITED KINGDOM, CANADA and INDIA pointed out that
the principle of admission of advisers should be expressly stated to eliminate
doubts in this respect, the Delegate of NEW ZEALAND withdrew this proposal.
/The Committee E/PC/T/C.6/64
Page 3
The Committee changed the words "or the Conference" in paragaph 3 to
"to the Conference" and with this change the article was approved.
6. Article 64
The Delegate of the UNITED KINGDOM announced that his Delegation was
about to submit proposals on the reformulation of this paragraph which would
be in the hands of the Committee within short notice.
The Delegate of FRANCE pointed out that any modification of paragraph 2
would involve a change in substance. He felt it necessary, however, to direct
the attention of the Drafting Committee to a discrepancy in voting procedure
under the Charter; whereas the Charter called for a two-thirds vote on
procedural questions such as in Article 66, paragraph 2, all most important
decisions or substance would be subject only to a simple majority vote. He
suggested to direct the attention of the Second Session of the Preparatory
Committee to this paradox.
The CHAIRMAN pointed out that notwithstanding these observations, Article 64
could remain unchanged if the provisions for voting in other articles would
be changed accordingly. The UNITED KINGDOM seconded this view.
The Delegate of AUSTRALIA raised the question whether a two thirds or a
simple majority of votes was necessary for the waiver of obligations under the
Charter. The CHAIRMAN declared that it was up to the Conference to decide
under Article 66, paragraph 2, what kind of a majority would be required for
such waivers. The Confererence might decide for more or less stringent voting
requirements.
The Delegate of the UNITED KINGDOM moved to change the wording of
Article 64 because in its present form the wording was too narrow.
The Delegate of the UNITED STATES explained that no majority vote beyond a
two-thirds Majority should ever be necessary, because only a two-thirds majority
was required for amendments to the Charter. Article 66, paragraph 2, should
be amended in this sense. He moved to insert the word "for" between the words
"provided" and "in", in the first line of paragraph 2 and the Committee agreed
to this amendment, referring the question of the final wording of this clause
to the Legal Drafting Sub-Committee.
/The Delegate E/PC/T/C.6/64
Page 4
The Delegate of FRANCE stressed again that Article 64 ought to state that
a two-thirds majority was required on all major substantive issues. The
Delegate of the UNITED KINGDOM suggested that the Committee should first analyze
the specific Charter provisions accord into which a vtote is to be taken and
then in the light or this analysis, decide whether the rules should be a
two-thirds or a simple majority vote.
The CHAIRMAN resserved the final decision of the Committee in this-respect
until after the UNITED KINGDOM proposals will have been distributed.
The CHAIRMAN, H.E. Mr. Colban, had arrived during this discussion but
insisted that the Vice-Chairman should continue to hold the chair throughout
this meeting, and Mr. ADARKAR remined in the chair throughout the session.
7. Article 65
The Delegation of SOUTH AFRICA suggested to charge the wording of paragraph 1
as follows:
The Conference shall meet in regular annual sessions and in such
special sessions as may be convoked by the Director-General at the reequest
of the Executive Board or of a majority of the Members". The Committee
agreed to this.
8. Article 66
Paragraph 1. The Delegate of the UNITED STATES explained that the words
"international organizations" was intended to cover both private and public
international organizations. The question whether the word "Members" should
be substituted for "Members of the Organization" was referred to the Legal
Drafting Committee.
Paragrph 2. The delegate of the UNITED STATES suggested that a clause
should be added that no greater majority than a two-thirds majority should be
required for any decision. The wording would have to be supplied by the Legal
Drafting Committee.
The Delegates of CANADA and SOUTH AFRICA felt that such a change was
unnecessary and that, in order to preserve the necessary fiexibility, the
possibility of a more highly qualified majority vote should not be excluded.
/The Delegate E/PC/T/C.6/64
Page 5
The Delegation of the UNITED STATES warned that not all "'procedures",
referred to in this paragraph should be viewed as voting procedures. To
the query of this Delegate of AUSTRALIA whether the term procedurese" included
voting procedures, the CHAIRMAN decided to refer this question to the
Legal Drafting Sub-Committee which should decide whether the wording in
paragraph 2 reflected correctly the intentions of this paragraph. The
CHAIRMAN also remarked that the texts as contained in the London draft had
been acceptable to the First Session of the Preparatory Committee.
Paragraph 3. The Delegate of the UNITED KINGDOM suggested to ask the
LegaI a Drafting Sub-Committee whether the words "may" in paragraphs 2 and 3
shouldv be used in view of the word "shall" in paragraph 1. The Delegate of a
AUSTRALIA suggested to include in this paragraph a catalogue of those powers
which may be delegated by the Conferene to the Executive Board. The Delegate
of FRANCE seconded this motion and suggested that the Administrative
Sub-Committee should deal with this question because the Legal Sub-Committee
was already over-burdened and there was danger that the work progress in the
Legal Drafting Sub-Committee night delay the work of the full Drafting Committee
if too heavy a burden were to be placed in the Legal Sub-Committee.
The Delegate of the UNITED KINGDOM pointed out that this question was
actually a matter for the consideration of the full Drafting Committee and the
Delegate of the UNITED STATES sugested to replace the word "Conference" in
the third line of this paragraph with the word "Organization"; furthermore,
he suggested to add the words "under the provisions of this Chapter" after the
last words of the paragraph.The AUSTRALIAN Delegate queried whether it would
not be possible for the Conference to take away powers from the commissions
and transfer them to the Executive Board and the UNITED STATES Delegate pointed
out that since commissions were anyway under the supervision of or responsible
to the executive Board, this was a purely academic question. To the question of
the Delegate of AUSTRALIA how the provisions on membership would be affected by
the UNITED STATES amendment the CHAIRMAN pointed out that Article 2 on
Membership will be transferred into Chapter VIII.
/The CHAIRMAN E/PC/T/C.6/64 The CANADIAN Delegate proposed to instruct that Secretariat to report to
the Committee whether the Charter contained any references to decisions of the
Conference in any other Chapter than Chapter VIII.
The CHAIRMAN requested the Secretariat to submit a list of references to
the Conference in other Chapters of the Charter and pending receipt of this list
the United States amendment was approved.
Paragraph 4. The UNITED STATES Delegate moved to amend Paragraph 4 by
addition of the following words: "No one Member shall be required to bear more
than one-third of the total expenses of the Oranization for any given
budgetary period". The Delegates of AUSTRAIA, CUBA and CHINA expressed
themselves against any such amendment which would involve a definite change in
substance, with the Delegate of CUBA especially explaining that he felt this
was not the time to propose such an amendment, since at present it was not known
how many countries would join the Organization.
The CHAIRMAN suggested to put this amendment as an alternative into square
brackets and the Delegate of the UNITED KINGDOM seconded this motion with the
Delegate of the UNITED STATES stating that this solution would be acceptable
to hiIm. The AUSTRALIAN Delegate moved, to refer to this amendment only in the
report of the Drafting Committee, while the Delegate of CANADA seconded the
motion to put it as an alternative into square brackets, explaining that he
considered that the ceiling of one-third was definitely a generous one.
The CHAIRMAN ruled provisionally that in view of the objections raised the
amendment should be included in the report. The Delegate of CANADA pointed
out that this would constitute an inconsistency with the procedure hither to
adopted, since minority proposals were generally ruled to be presented as
alternatives in square brackets and only not seconded motions mentioned in the
report....
ThcDelegate oCHINHf .suggested to leave the percentage to the Conference,
dcnhe SOUTHJAFRIfCNI elegate referred to the report of the fF 'irst Session
of tPrephe aratory Committee wh proichvided for trmeatent of
coibuntrtions parallel with crib..butions to the UnitNed ations;
he nrevetheless seconded the motion of the United States to
establish aa muximm ceiling. TheITi UED SES TATDelegate moved to
/include E/PC/T/C.6/64.
Page 7
include the amendment as an alternative in square brackets, provided the ceiling
principle were acceptable to a Majority.
With the Delegates of AUSTRALIA, CUBA and CHINA going on record with the
reservation against any ceiling principle as such, the CHAIRMAN ruled to refer
to the United States amendment in the report of the Committee.
Paragraph 5. The Delegate of AUSTRALIA moved to delete the word "develop"
in the first line and to change the word "recommend" to "adopt"; also to
substitute the words "failure to take action" for "rejection". The Delegate of
the UNITED KINGDOM suggested to retain the word "recommend". Be explained that
the Organization could in no case bind its members in respect to adoption of
conventions and agreements. The Delegate of FRANCE, reading the text of the
paragraph in the French version, suggested that the FRENCH formulation was
expressing the intentions more correctly than the English version, and moved to
retranslate the French wording into English by substituting "in case that Members
do not comply with the recommendations". The Delegate of CANADA suggested the
words "sponsor", "initiate" or "promote" in lieu of "develop" but moved to
retain some wording with a similar connotation to the word "develop".
The Delegate of CHILE suggested to use the words "other conventions and
agreements" in the third line of the paragraph. The Delegate of the UNITED
KINGDOM suggested the following text: "prepare and promote and, by the
affirmative votes of two-thirds of its Members, recommend for their acceptance".
The Delegate of AUSTRALIA queried why in this context, in distinction from
Article 664, the reference was simply to "Members" and not to "Members present
and a voting". The Delegate of the UNITED KINGDOM explained that his Delegation
had given same thought to this question and come to the conclusion that for
reasons of expediency, when quick decisions will be needed, the clause "Members
present and voting" should apply, so as to avoid the necessity of
cabling to non-present Members for their decision. He felt, however,
/that the E/PC/T/C.6/64 Page 8
that the case of paragraph 5 was one where the clause "Members present and
voting" should apply. The Delegates Of CANADA and the UNITED STATES
seconded the re-wording if the UNITED KINGDOM and this was adopted by the
Committee.
The meeting was adjourned until Tuesday, 11 February, at 2:45 p.m.
. - ; . . . |
GATT Library | jn098hs9814 | Summary Record of the Eighteenth Meeting (IIIb) : Held at the Cepitol, Harana, Cuba, Tuesday, 23 December 1947 at 10:30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 23, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 23/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.18 and E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.17-31 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/jn098hs9814 | jn098hs9814_90190241.xml | GATT_155 | 2,255 | 15,029 | United Nations Nations Unies
UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE
ON DU E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.l8
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 23 December 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
ThIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE EIGHTEENTH MEETING (IIIb)
Held at the Cepitol, Harana, Cuba,
Tuesday, 23 December 1947 at 10:30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. L. D. WILGRES (Canada)
1. ARTICLE 20 - General Elimination of Quantitative Restrictions
(First Reeding).
C0NTINUATION OF DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED AMMENDMENTS AND GENEVA DRAFT NOTES
(Document E/CONF.2, /C.3/14).
Mr.. KAHMA (Fiinland) drew attention to the exceptional conditions of
Finland at the present time due to the lose during the war of ten percent.
of her total area. Half a million of her people had been compelled to leave
their homes and their properties and move inside the new frontier. Credits
from United States, Argentine and Brazil had been of great help in
rehabilitation, but these had to be repaid by means of exports and services
rendered, and for the time being Finland would be compelled to maintain
controls and to use quantitative restrictions for the maintenance of
equilibrium in her balance of payments.
But her attitude with regard to elimination of trade barriers was not
determined by the Prevailing circumstances. Industrial development had.
proceeded at a rapid rate between 1920 and 1940 under the stimulus of only
moderate tariffs; moreover, the specialities which she produced for export.
needed large world markets and for those reasons his country was in favour
of eliminating as far as possible the barriers to free trade. The danger
of fluctuations must be recognized, but the .guiding principle of
industrialization must be that new industries should increase in efficiency
until they were able to compete on an equal basis with overseas Industries.
It was vital for underdeveloped countries to mobilize the resources.
of self-help, in which case the need for quantitative restrictions would be
greatly limited. Those Articles with which Committee III b was concerned,
should be adopted mainly in their present form, with only minor amendments
such as those of the delegate of Sweden with whom he was in agreement.
Mr. OLDlNI (Chile) stated that at Geneva the use of quantitative
restrictions for economic development without prior approval had been
/rejected. E /CONF.2/C.3 /SR .18
Page 2
rejected - possibly because such a proposal granted too little. Yet
quantitative restrictions might be used to protect a country's balance of
payments - a provision which seemed to suggest that the economic life of
a country and its possibilities for development were less important than
the balance of payments.
Quantitative restrictions were necessary for a variety of reasons.
Subsidies were a luxury- of the rich and the raising of tariffs burdened
the consumer; moreover, the aim of tariff reductions laid. down in Article 17
would be in conflict with their more extensive use for economic development.
The provisions of Article 13, which laid down a procedure for obtaining
prior approval, were very complicated and required a country to subordinate
itself to the opinion of the ITO which might jeopardize its future
advancement.
If the Chilean amendment was considered to be too sweeping, he was
willing to discuss it in the Sub-Committee. A well-drafted article should
meet the wishes of the undeveloped countries while closing the door to
abuses.
Mr. ROBLES (Guatemala) referred to the principles laid down in
Article 1 of the Charter. Those principles would have to be carried out
in varying ways according to the varying economic situations of Member
countries. His country needed to impose quantitative restrictions in
certain cases in order to develop industries and raise standards of living.
Countries. like the United Kingdom end the United States had only had to
impose tariffs when they were developing, as. the world was then in a less
complicated state, and they were not threatened by imperialiam. Such forms
of protection were now insufficient. Developing countries must maintain
a balance between costs, wages, prices of real estate and prices of
consumption goods. Since Article 21 could only be invoked, to forestall or
correct a balance-of.payments crisis, an under-developed country .would be
as backward as ever end as subject to cyclical fluctuations after the
restrictions were lifted. Nor did Articles 13, 20, 22, 40 end 41 adequately
cover the situation.
Quantitative restrictions soundly applied were one of the instruments
of government most necessary to promote to a certain degree and at a certain
time the development of backward countries. Without these restrictions,
the raw materials of a country could be purchased at low prices by foreign
countries and-then returned to the country of origin as high-priced
manufactured goods.
The use of restrictions would be sefeguarded by the goodwill, good
faith and honesty. of countries- which knew how to fulfil their- undertakings;
it must also be remembered that industrialized countries were the best
/customers of' E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.18
Page 3
customers of other industrialized countries.
Mr. OLMEDO (Mexico) said that Metico had no exchange controls and had
never resorted to quantitative restrictions except in one case of emergency,
namely to safeguard its balance of payments. Quantitative restrictions
should be limited to extreme cases and should be non-discriminatory; but
countries should be permitted to use their resources In the way they thought
fit and in order to satisfy legitimate aspirations. Countries with a low
standard of living should be permitted to forbid the import of luxuries.
The existing exceptions required further elaboration since they did not
provide equitable treatment for mainly agricultural economies. The amendment
to Article 1 submitted by Mexico might remove the necessity for an exception
in Article 20.
Mr-. DEDMAN (Australia' stated that his delegation was opposed to the
inclusion in the Charter of permission to use quantitative restrictions for
protective purposes without prior approval for the following reasons: (1)
Quantitative restrictions applied against the exports of a country which
defended on a few major exports could have devastating results on the economy
of that country. Under-developed countries were usually dependent on one
or a few exports. (2) Poist and recent experience had proved that
quantitative restrictions were more likely to be used by economically
developed countries for the purpose of protecting their domestic agriculture
than by those with nascent industries; such restrictions would therefore be
detrimental to the latter. (3) The maintenance of prior approval under
Article 13 was an essential protection for under-developed and primary-
producing countries. (4) If a country could prove its case under
paragraph 4 (b) of that Article, the ITO was compelled to permit the
imposition of the proposed restriction. Further, the natural sympathies of
Members of the Organization were unlikely to place serious barriers on the
use of quantitative restrictions except in cases in which their effects
would be- seriously detrimental or when other adequate alternative measures
were available.
The under-developed countries should hesitate before abandoning
the opportunity to protect themselves against the unwise use of quantitative
restrictions directed at their mejor exports. He recalled that during
depression of the 20's and 30's every industrialized European country had
imposed quantitative restrictions against primary products with disastrous
effects on the economy of certain other countries. Australia had not enough
confidence in the future to be prepared to place in the hands of importing
countries the unqualified right to impose quantitative restrictions against
major exports. Occasions might arise when the imposition of quantitative
restrictions was not merely the most effective but the least restrictive
/method of EICONF.2/C.3/SR.18
Page 4
method of protecting a new industry and, if such facts could be established,
the Organization had no option but to grant approval.
Mr. WILCOX (United states of America) declared that tne issue was
whether'quantitative restrictions for protective purposes could be used
free by all countries or only used in the absence of other adequate measures.
The United States had 'reluctantly come to the conclusion that quantitative
restrictions should be permitted for purely protective purposes in exceptional
cases provided there were appropriate safeguards. It could not, however,
agree to those amendments under which it would be possible for any country
to impose quantitative restrictions on the imports of any other country.
Rapid industrialization could only be achieved through the employment
of capital, technology and know-how, and investors would not readily believe
in the possibilities of success of a developing industry if markets were
everywhere closed by extensive quantitative restrictions. If quantitative
restrictions were to be employed as weapons in a widespread economic conflict,
all the advantages in that conflict would lie with the big and strong-
countries, not with the smaller and undeveloped countries; it could not be
supposed that the strong countries would voluntarily for go the use of
quantitative restrictions if the small countries enjoyed complete freedom
of action. Mcreover, such phrases as "an early stage of industrial
development" raised many difficulties, since it could be contended with
truth that many States in the United States were undeveloped.
'The United States was ready to surrender its freedom to impose
quantitative restrictions for protective purposes, and would do everything
in its power to see that quantitative res ictions were never employed
harmfully to other countries. But if all restraint on quantitative
restrictions should be removed by the adoption of some of the amendments
proposed to-Article2O, the United States would find it difficult to resist
demands for retaliation.
Numerous situations could be imagined in which other countries,
especially the small and undeveloped ones, would suffer the neatest damage
to their economies if the United States were ever to indulge in such
retaliatory action.
If the trading pattern now written into the Charter were adopted, there
would be no official limit of any sort on the total quantity of goods that
other countries. could sell in the United States; but if all restraints on
quantitative. restrictions were abolished end if the Uited States followed
the example of others, then the effects would be both serious and
far-reaching. It was difficult to see what purpose an International Trade
Organization could serve under these circumstances.
Mr. ROYER (France) stated that any excessive hindrance to free trade,
/regardless of E/CONF. 2/C.3/SR.18
Page 5
regardless of its nature, should be eliminated. At Geneva France had
submitted proposals condemning prohibitive tariffs but was met by resistance
from the under-developed countries, who would have been the beneficiaries.
Quantitative restrictions must be used cautiously, precisely because they
were such an effective weapon.
Certainly the Charter abandoned quantitative restrictions as a normal
means of protection, but it did not absolutely condemn such measures;
exceptions were provided in Articles 13 and 14 as well as in 20 and 21.
That position was acceptable to the French delegation. But the Argentine,
Chilean and Celanese amendments seemed to propose a strict Charter for the,
heavily industrialized countries and a much looser one for the so-called
under-developed countries - an arrangement which his government would find
hard to accept.
Referring to the comment of the delegate of Switzerland that quantitative
restrictions were outlawed in the Charter while exchange control was less
severly dealt with, the delegate of France called attention to Article 24,
paragraph 4.91. The representatives of the United States and Australia
had pointed out the dangers of the free use of quantitative restrictions.
There might be specific cases in which they were necessary but the provisions
of Article 13 took account of that fact; and paragraph 4 (b) of that Article
stated that the Organization shall allow justifiable quantitative restrictions
when they did not cause excessive damage to others. The spirit in which
these matters were dealt with in practice was illustrated by the fact that
France lad not at Geneva required Chile, Syria or Lebanon to remove the
quantitative restrictions they were imposing at the present time.
The Charter would not produce an upheaval of economies but would attain
the desired end in a gradual manner. There were exceptions provided for the
transition period in Article 14 and the delegation of France reserved it right
to make proposals concerning these. There could be no Charter without
international economic commitments. The world must either accept certain
minimum commitments or bear the consequences of uncontrolled national
sovereignty. The advantages and disadvantages must be weighed: all states
must be willing to relinquish their sovereignty to some extent. France was
prepared to do that end to accept the powers of the Organization, which were
moderate indeed and were not those of a super-state.
Mr. STUCKI (Switzerland) said that the United States' delegate had
claimed that it was in Switzerland's Interest to outlaw quantitative
restrictions because of her small size and dependence on exports. But
Switzerland exported only 13 per cent of its total exports to the United
States, where there were no exchange difficulties. However, the countries
receiving 87 per cent of her efforts were in a different situation. A country
/such as his E/CONF. 2/C.3/SR.18
Page 6
such as his could not accept the arbitrary closing of doors to its exports end
the consequent evil of unemployment, which was allowed Under the provisions of
Article 21.
Mr. DUNAWAY (Liberia) stated that he supported the general purpose of
Article 20, but paragraph 2 (c), which permitted a long list of exceptions
without prior approval, was not acceptable. Ninety-five per cent of his
country's exports-consisted of natural rubber which could be banned by those
restrictions. Moreover,. each new application of such restrictions would
encourage reprisals end so result eventually In the strangulation of trade.
He was therefore opposed to all amendments allowing quantitative restrictions
for protection of new industries.
The CHAIRMAN announced that the general discussion of Article 20 would
be resumed at the next meeting of Committee III b.
The meeting rose at 1.00 p.m. |
GATT Library | fc650zx5598 | Summary record of the Eighth Meeting : Held at Havana, Friday, 12 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 13, 1947 | Fifth Committee: Inter-Governmental Commodity Agreements | 13/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.8 and E/CONF. 2/C. 5/SR. 1-15 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/fc650zx5598 | fc650zx5598_90200091.xml | GATT_155 | 1,642 | 10,786 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.8
ON DU 13 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
.
FIFTH COMMITTEE: INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMODITY AGREEMENTS
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE EIGHTH MEETING
Held at Havana, Friday, 12 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. George HAKIM (Lebanon)
CONTINUATION OF THE FIRST READING OF CHAPTER VI - SECTION B
Articles. 55 and 56
Mr. COREA (Ceylon) explained that the purpose of the amendments put
forward by his Delegation was to lay down a procedure which would allow
both study groups and conference to take action to cope with any special
difficulties which arose. .
Under the present terms of Article 55, a study group would consist
of experts and would make recommendations to governments. Under Article 56,
conferences also were envisaged, either on the recommendation of a study
group or at the request of substantially interested members, or at the
initiative of the Organization. This procedure had been outlined clearly
by the Australian representative at a previous meeting. The difficulty
with the present procedure was that a study group would have to make
recommendations and then a conference would have. to be convened if an
inter-governmental commodity agreement was considered necessary. By such
procedure much time would be wasted.
It had been said that there was nothing to prevent a study group from
trasferming itsalf into a conference. The amendments were designed to
clarify that point and to put its intention into concrete form Mr. Corea
asked to make some adjustment to the amendment he had submitted to
Article 55 (3).
At the end of the first sentence of paragraph 3, his delegation wished
the addition of a phrase: -
" ... or may discuss such. measures relating to these. difficulties".
There was no need to halt the work of a study group and start the procedure
of a conference.
A new paragraph 4 had been proposed to ensure that a study group could
remain in existence until the Organization should decide that it no longer
served a useful purpose.
/Mr.PETER E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.8
Page 2
Mr. PETER (France) had no objection tb the Ceylon amendment to
Article 55 (1) but did not agree with the amendment to paragraph 3.
He was opposed to the terms of the proposed new paragraph 4 because
it was for the government representatives on the study group to decide
when their task had been accomplished. He did not think that unnecessary
delays would take place. It should be: remembered in that connection that
a study group would have the function of advising Sovernments and
preparing compromise solutions. Only after that would it be time to
convene a conference. Article 56 also provided for exceptions to this
procedure in appropriate cases. He welcomed the Uruguayan proposal for
the deletion of the word "substantial".
In reply, Mr. COPEA (Ceylon) emphasized again that the aim of the
wording of his amendment to Article 55 (3) was to combine the functions
of recommending and of taking measures, that is, to prevent duplication.
Mr. CAPLAN (United Kingdom) said that with the exception of the
amendment which would grant to a study group the functions of a conference,
he was prepared to meet Mr. Corea. He agreed that a study group should
continue to exist until its members decided that its work had been
completed. He also accepted the Uruguayan proposal concernimg the deletion
of the word "substantial". He was prepared to accept a more democratically
worded. version of the Egyptian proposal, but doUbted whether, from a
practical point of view. the Peruvian proposal would perform a-y useful
purpos e.
Mr. CHAVEZ (Peru), in presenting the proposal of his Deleéationy
recalled the remarks of a representative at the previous meeting to-the--
effect that not all unilateral measures could be considered undesirable.
It seemed reasonable, however, that nations which planned. to participate
in a conference should not keep in force any unilateral measures which
they had previously ad.opted.
Mr. McCARMTHY (Australia) was not in favour of the Peruvian proposel
and pointed out that it has quite possible that the terms of a commodity
agreement might be in conflict with the terms of Chapter IV, while at the
time, the purpose of the agreement would be to reconcile Its
objectives with the purpose of Chapter IV.
It was conceivable, for example, that the existence of quotas would
be considered necessary in a wheat agreement by both producing and consuming
countries. Such an agreement might also recognize the existence of
subsidies in some form.
The problem, therefore, was not simply one of having countries abandon
all unilateral practices, but of reconciling the various governmental acts
/which regulated E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.8
Page 3
which regulated the trade ir a particular commodity. As another example,
Mr. McCarthy drew attention to the posaibiiity of a wool agreement to which
the United States might be a party, but which did not make it necessary for
that country to abandon duties on wool Such duties might therefore
continue te exist after an agreement had been concluded.
Mr. BOGAADT- (Netherlands) supported the point of view of the Australian
representative. The adoption of any relations contrary to the principles
of Chapter IV was forbidden in that Chapter IV and therefore there was no
need for a further reference in Chapter VI. As non-members not bound by the
provisionse of the Charter could participate in commodity conference ITO
members would be place in a disadvantageous position.
Mr. CAPLAN (United kingdom) pointed out that it would be impossible to
comply with the term of the amendment if it were adopted. Commodity
regulations were laid down by parliamentary bodies and no government could
request their abolition on the grounds that a conference was to take place.
He shared the objections expressed by the representatives of Australla and
the Netherlands.
As his proposal had. received no Seneral support, Mr. CHAVEZ (Peru)
withdrew the amendment.
Mr. KUNTER (Turkey) proposed the insertion of the word "mostly" before
"dependent!' in the Egptian amendment; a country might produce one conmodity:
of great importance to its foreign trade, although it vas not entirely
dependent' on that commodity.
The ÇHAIRMAN announced that the Turkish amendment, the Egyptian proposal
and the amendment made verbally by the representative of El Salvador at a
previous meeting would be discussed by the Sub-Committee.
Article 54 - Additional sub-Paragraph suggested by the Delegation of Uruguay
Mr. HEAUSWIRTH (Switzerland), after obtaining permission to make a
statement on the additional paragraph suggested by the Delegation of Uruguay,
recalled that Chapter VI had not been drafted in a way which would force
countries to sign an agreement which vas the result of an unsuccessful
Conference. It was to be hoped that producing and consuming countries' 'ould
co-operate with each' other with respect to the conclusion of commodity
agreements, but such agreements would be useless if there were not mutual
satisfaction. Experience had shown that agreements could only be concluded
for primary commodities, that is, raw materials. It was difficult in the
case of industrial products because of the lack of standardization; as an
example, Mr. Hauswirth drew attention to tractors, which varied widely as
regards size and cost. It had been wise from the outset to limit the scope
of Chapter VI to primary commodities.
More important than the provisions of Chapter VI was the spirit of
/co-operationn Page 4 E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.8
co-operation which should exist between producer and consumera. The
representative of Colombia had proposed the adoption of an escape clause
for producers; since there should be an equIlibrium of interest, it would
surely be appropriate to adopt & similar provision concernIng. consumers.
He hoped that the Sub-Comittee would take this into consideration.
Mr. STEWARAT (Uruguay) felt that the Uruguayan amendment did come
within the purview of the Charter and saw no reason why they could -not be
included in commodity agreements.
Article 57'
Mr. VIRATA (Philippines) explained that his amendment should be inserted
water the words "Under such agreements" in paragraph.(c). The purpose of the
amendment was to protect the interests of countries participating in an
agreement against any harmful measures taken by non-participants.
Mr. CAPLAN (United Kingdom) agreed that-the wording of the Phillppiner
amendment was stronger than that of the original text, but preferred. the
latter.
Mr. McCARTHY (Australia) sympathized with the purpose of the Philippine
amendment but drew attention to the fact that although a country could
decide not to participate in an agreement when first established, it might.
at a later date decide to subscribe to it,. Paragraph (c) as it now read
was preferable because it would lead, to the treating of each such case on
its merits.
Mr. VIRATA (Philippines) thought it wiser to state that a country would
only receive certain advantages if it respected the responsibilities which
vent with those advantages. Because of the experience of his country, he
preerred a plain statement of fact, rather than have the question left
open for the future. Re wished to consult his delegation concerning the
question, and-. would communicate its vieves to the Committee at a later date..
The representatives of the UNITED STATES and AUSTRALIA agreed .with the
underlying idea of the Philippine amendment. It was agreed that the.
amendment should, be considered in the Sub-Committee. - _
Article 58 -
Mr, LACARRA (Mexico) explained that the first part of his amendment.
was based. on the remarks of the representative of Ceylon concerning the need
for greater. clarification as to the respective functions of study. groups.
and conference. .;The second part of the amendment emphasized the provisional
character which should be Given to all commodity agreements.
Mr. SCHWENGER (United States) pointed, out that a new point had been
stressed in the second. part of the Mexican amendment which might leal to
delays.
/The CHAIRMAN E/CONF.2/C.5/SR .8
Page 5
The CHAIRMAN announced that the first reading of Chapter VI was
completed.
The meeting rose at 5.50 p.m. |
GATT Library | vw395np0022 | Summary Record of the Eighth Meeting : Held at Lake Success on 29 January 1947 at 10:30 a.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, January 30, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 30/01/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/23 and E/PC/T/C.6/21-36/ADD.1 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/vw395np0022 | vw395np0022_90230059.xml | GATT_155 | 1,619 | 10,418 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/23
AND ECONOMIQUE 30 January 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE EIGHTH MEETING
Held at Lake Success on 29 January 1947 at 10:30 a.m.
(Chairman: H.E.M. Eric Colban)
In opening the meeting, the CHAIRMAN suggested, and the Committee
agreed, that Articles 1,. 75, 77 and the provisions dealing with penalties
in the case of non-payment of contributions, all of which were not discussed
at the London meeting of the Preparatory Committee, should be referred to
the Administrative Sub-Committee.
After some discussion it was decided that the Secretariat should
continue to issue the minutes of the Drafting Committee and its Sub-Committees
as hitherto.
The CHAIRMAN then made reference to documents E/PC/T/C.6/15 and
E/PC/T/C.6/W.31 giving Articles 26 and 27 as provisionally adopted.
The Committee proceeded to discuss Article 29, paragraph 3, as drafted
in the Report (E/PC/T/33). It was decided that the square brackets in this
paragraph be provisionally deleted.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) suggested that the text of the first Proviso
in this paragraph should be amended as follows:
" Provided that any country which is not a member of the
International Monetary Fund, may become a member of the Organization
if, upon accepting this Charter, it undertakes to enter into a special
exchange agreement with the Organization, which would become part of
its obligations under this Charter."
In answer to a question of Mr. PHILLIPS (AUSTRALIA) the CHAIRMAN
explained that a country which does not accept the exchange agreement cannot
/become E/PC/T/C.6/23
Pege 2
become a member of the Organitation.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) confirmed that the bargaining position of the
organization will be strengthened by this amendment.
It was agreed that the above text and the original London text should
be presented in the tentative draft in parallel columns for consideration
in the second reading.
Paragraphs 4, 5 and 6: were provisionally adopted as drafted in the
Report. In paragraph 6, line 2, the words "as to" were inserted before the
word "whether".
Article 30. General Undertaking Regarding Subsidies, Elimination of
Export Subsidies. Exceptions.
The CHAIRMAN made reference to documents E/PC/T/C.6/W.21, C.6/W.23 and
C.6/26 and the Article was discussed as amended by the United States
Delegation (C.6/W.21).
Paragraph 1: The amendments of the United States Delegation were
adopted with the following changes suggested by various delegations:
The words "or maintains" were added after "grants" in line 2;
the words in square brackets in line 3 were deleted at the suggestion of
the CHAIRMAN;
In line 3 the words "directly or indirectly" were inserted after the
word "operates" at the suggestion of Mr. WHITE (NEW ZEALAND);
In lines 4 and 5 the words "a product" were replaced by "any
product " on the suggestion of Mr. SMITH (CANADA);
In line 7 the word "anticipated" was replaced by "estimated" at the
suggestion of Mr. GUERRA (CUBA);
In line 8 the words "the product imported into and exported" were
replaced by "the affected product or products imported into or exported"
at the suggestion of Mr. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM);
In line 11 the words "any Member" were changed into "any other
Member".
In line 12 the words "the operation of" were deleted both the last
mentioned changes at the suggestion of Mr. PHILLIPS (AUSTRALIA).
/Paragraph 2: E/PC/T/C.6/23
Page 3
Paragraph 2 On the suggestion of Mr. PHILLIPS (AUSTRALIA) this
paragraph was divided in two sub-paragraphs:
(a) at the beginning of the paragraph, and
(b) beginning with the sentence "Members shall give effect", etc.
The changes introduced by the United States Delegation were
adopted.
The CHAIRMAM supported the United States suggestion that the words
"would be considered as a case under paragraph 1" should be provisionally
deleted and this was agreed to.
Mr. ALVAREZ (CHILE) wished to insert the following interpretation
of this paragraph in the report of the Drafting Committee:
"In the opinion of the Chilean Delegation this paragraph should
not be interpreted so as to prevent countries far removed from
world markets to sell their products at current world market
prices even though these may be lower than the prices charged in the
domestic market, such action not being the result of a direct or
inedirect subsidy or of the establishment of any other system."
Mr. ALVAREZ (CHILE) contended ",at this was in accordance with the
genemal opinion of the Preparatory Committee in London.
Mr. GUERRA (CUBA) wished to refer again to this paragraph at the next
meeting of the Drafting Committee.
Mr. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM) wished that the Report should make it
clear that paragraph 1 refers also to export subsidies and that paragraph 2
has to be regarded as a special case rather then an alternative to
paragraph 1.
Mr. MA (CHINA) was willing to withdraw his reservation (Report,
page 16, paragraph (d) (ix), if satisfied that the point is covered
elsewhere.
Paragraph 3: The CHAIRMAN referred to the amendment suggested by
the New Zealand Delegation (C.6/W.23) which was discussed at some length.
/Mr. WHITE E/PC/T/C.6/23
Page 4
Mr. WHITE (NEW ZEALAND) explained the meaning of the amendment in
accordance with the views expressed at the London meeting of the Preparatory
Committee (Report, page 16, paragraph d (xi)).
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) pointed out that this amendment changed the
concept of the Article and that it could not be accepted without redrafting
the whole Article.
The Committee decided to replace the words "domestic price of a
primary product" in line 1 by "domestic price or of returns to domestic
producers of a primary product".
The Committee then adopted the amended draft presented by the
United States Delegation with one change in line 5. The words "not to be"
should read, "not to involve".
Paragraph 4 (a): The Committee adopted this sub-paragraph as amended
by the United States Delegation and decided to delete the words "whether
falling under paragraph 1 or paragraph 2" in lines 1 and 2.
The suggestion made in the Report on page 16, paragraph d (xii) was
referred to the Legal Drafting Sub-Committee.
Paragraph 4 (b): Mr. SMITH (CANADA) pointed out that this sub-paragraph
should be deleted. It was illogical and unreasonable in principle as it
would allow any Member which desired to subsidize exports of any primary
product to disregard entirely the obligations imposed in paragraphs 1 and 2
and also in effect the obligations envisaged in paragraph 4 (a). It was
reasonable that there should be special provisions for primary commodities,
through the Commodity Agreement previsions of Chapter VII, and this was
provided in paragraph 4 (a). But under paragraph 4 (b) any Member, merely
by going through the motions of negotiating regarding a Commodity Agreement,
and there adopting a position such that no agreement was in fact reached,
could free itself from all these restrictions and act unilaterally.
Paragraph 4 (b) is thus not even a mere loophole; it is a wide open space
in the careful provisions being developed to restrict unfair practices.
Mr.LEDDY (UNITED STATES) explained that there may be a certain, though
/not considerable E/PC/T/C.6/23
Page 5
not considerable, risk of abuse but that sub-paragraph (c) of this Article
was an important check.
Mr. SMITH (CANADA) felt that the apparent safeguard envisaged in
paragraph 4 (c) was not adequate, as the selection of a representative period
was left to the Member wishing to use export subsidies, and the fluctuations
in world trade in primary products has been in the past such that almost any
desired result could be obtained in one period or another. Moreover, in the
past within which the "representative period" is to be chosen, the very
abuses of unilateral and nationalist trade practices (including subsidies)
which this Charter is designed to restrict, flourished.
Mr. GUERRA (CUBA) though sympathizing with the Canadaian view, was
inclined to accept Mr. Leddy' s explanation.
Mr. SMITH (CANADA) said that Canada would reserve its position on
paragraph 4 (b) which it considered unreasonable in principle.
The Committee adopted provisionally this sub-paragraph as amended by the
United States Delegation with the following change: The words "paragraphs 1
and 2" in lines 5 and 6 to be replaced by "paragraph 2".
Paragraph 4 (c): The Committes adopted the changes introduced by the
United States Delegation. One of these changes involved deletion of the
word "primary" in line 3.
Mr. GUERRA (CUBA) explained that the deletion of the word "primary"
was suggested already at the Preparatory Committee in London in order to
cover border cases of such products which cannot be classed as "primary
products" in the ordinary sense of this term.
Mr. TORREZ (BRAZIL) concurred in this explanation.
In view of this change Mr. GUEERA (CUBA) and Mr. LECUYER (FRANCE)
suggested that this sub-paragraph should not remain in paragraph 4 (which
deals with primary products) but be made a new paragraph 5. The present
paragraph 5 would then become paragraph 6. The Committee agreed to this
change.
/Mr. MA (CHINA) E/PC/T/C.6/23
Page 6
Mr. MA (CHINA) requested that the following reservation be included in
the Report of the Drafting Committee:
"In the opinion of the Chinese Delegation the share of export
of any primary products in the world trade (whether or not acquired
as a result of the use of subsidies or similar measures) should not be
subject to a limitation by its share in the world trade during any
previous representative period, except when it is proved that such
export forms part of a burdensome world surplus."
Paragraph 5 (now 6) was adopted without change.
Mr. KORTEWEG ( NETHERLANDS) declared that he would consult his
Government with regard to the suggestions presented at the London meeting of
the Preparatory Committee (Report, page 17, paragraph d (xiv)). |
GATT Library | js295yb0709 | Summary Record of the Eighth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Friday, 19 December 1947, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 19, 1947 | First Committee: Employment and Economic Activity | 19/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.1/SR.8, E/CONF.2/C.1/C/1-4, and C.1/SR.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/js295yb0709 | js295yb0709_90180280.xml | GATT_155 | 1,859 | 12,370 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C .1/SR.8
ON DU 19 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FIRST COMMITTEE: EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE EIGHTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Friday, 19 December 1947, at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. J. J. DEDMAN (Australia)
1. CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SUB-COMMITEE A (document E/CONF.2/C.1/9)
The CHAIRMAN requested the Chairman of the Sub-Committee to introduce
the report.
Mr. LIEU (China) introduced the report of that Sub-Committee.
Mr. MARTINS (Brazil) considered that the draft submitted by
Sub-Committee A was a great improvement. He suggested that the words
"conditions of effective remuneration" should replace the words "wages" in
the second sentence of paragraph 1.
Mr. AMADOR (Mexico) said his delegation withdrew the reservation made
in Sub-Committee A, agreed with the text of Article 4 as drafted by that
Sub-Committee, and supported the amendment proposed by the ILO
(E/CONF.2/C.1/12).
Mr. PEREZ MARTINEZ (Argentina) pointed out that his delegation had been
forced to reserve its position in the Sub-Committee as documents were not
available in the Spanish language but that it was now able to approve the
text. He suggested that in the first sentence of paragraph 1 the following
words should be added: "and especially that laid down in paragraph 6 of
Chapter I." That would make the sentence consistent with the amendent
suggested by the Argentine delegation to paragraph 6 which would be considered
by the Sixth Committee.
Mr.van S CLLZEN (Belgium) considered that the new draft was a great
imrovement on the the Article 4 drawn up at Geneva. Referring to the second
sentence of paragraph 1, he felt it should be redrafted as undumphasis
was placed on the relation existing between fair labours standards and
productivity. He suggested the following wording: "They recognize that
all countries have a common interest in the achievement, maintenance and
improvement af fair labour standards related to productivity." :
A". -M El Salv)adori flt tihat uuld 4t hocffesd pn eie-o4qt frst.
nce of pSngrgraph 1ra at the internatiaonnl eclarations, conveionstcsnad
agreements referred to were those entered into byinter-govemrnental
/organizations. E/CONF.2/C.1/SR.8 Page 2
organizations. He also wished to know why the words "economic development"
did not appear after the words "international trade" in the third sentence.
Mr. LEROY (Haiti) agreed with the new draft of Article 4.
Mr. COREA (Ceylon) supported the remarks of the representative of
Belgium in connection with the second sentence of paragraph 1. Minimum
working conditions and minimum living standards must be recognized apart
from any question of productivity. His delegation could support the present
wording of the third sentence providing that it implied that any member of
the ITO adversely affected by unfair labour conditions could ask the
Organization to investigate the matter. If the Chairman of the Sub-Committee
felt that that was not so and that the matter was not covered by
Articles 89 and 90, then he would suggest that explicit mention be made
in Article 4 of the fact that the ITO could be asked by members to
investigate unfair labour conditions and wage standards.
The CHAIRMAN pointed out that the matter mentioned by the representative
of Ceylon was dealt with in paragraph 15 of the Sub-Committee's report.
Mr. LIEU (China), Chairman of Sub-Committee A said the point raised
by the represenatative of Ceylon was covered by the third paragraph of the
new draft. In connection with the point raised regarding the relationship
between fair labour standards and productivity, he emphasized that all
countries could not adopt the same standards as conditions varied so much.
One could not he thought, refer to "improvement" of labour standards already
descrited as "fair" suggested by the representative of Belgium. -
Whether it should be specified in the first secentent tha such
declarations, cononvetis and-amgreeents shoue goverld bnmental,
r-g0ovenmenOVe or' prvate, could be discussed by the Committee. The
point raised by the representative of Brazil regarding real wages might
also be discussed by the Committee. -
Mr. FESQUET (Cuba) -considered that the amendment proposed by the
representatle-of.3l Salvador should be submitted to the Legal Department
of the Secretariat. Referring to the remarks of the representative of the
Argentine, h e ke ltthat-he'-omon ttee should not'tlce-y decision OAthe'!
matter until Committee VI had Iiven its final decision on Chapter 1. The
remmrks or the representative of Belgiun were well-founded, but it should
be remembered thaomthe texwasf the droft before the Canmittee Wa a comprPmise
one, and took account of the various points of view expressed in a lengthy
series of amendments submitted by several delegations,
Mr. ROYER (Fzance) assmciated himself with the statements ade by the
rePreseitative of Cuba. Referring to the proposals made for redrafting
certain parts of Articentene 4, he considered that the firs- s ce of
paragraph 1 mietba mde mooreacl earar if the words "to which the are84!s"
- /were added E/CONF.2/C.1/SR Page 3
were added, He had some legal misgivings regardings the mention of Chapter I
of the Charter, as suggested by the representative of Argentina. He shared
the views of the representative of Belgium regarding the second sentence of
the first paragraph, and suggested that the words "as advances in
productivity may permit" should be replaced by the words "with a view to the
attainment of this end." Referring to the remarks of the representative of
El Salvador regarding the third sentence, he suggested that the words
"in the maintenance of full employment and intentional trade" should
replace the words "in international trade".
Mr. SHACKLE (United Kingdom) suggested that the point raised by
El Salvador would be met by substituting the word "inter-governmental"
for "international". He saw no objection to the amendment proposed on
behalf of the ILO.
The CHAIRMAN proposed that the Sub-committee should be asked to
re-examine the text in the light of the criticisms expressed and the various
suggestions for its improvement.
Mr.MULLER (Chile), supported by Mr.FER (Turkey) suggested, the
addition to the third sentence of the words "in whose countries such
conditions exist", or merely "within its territory". -;
ESUETtMr. Pbthou the text omf the Sub-Comittee was clear.:
MrlL. Hhaiti) pointed out that undue concern in drafting matters
might eventually restrict the intent of the paragraph. He could not agree
to the deletion of the words "wages and working conditions."
MPIERSrN. ited States of America) supported the suggestion for the
addition of the words "within its territory", since the discuhssion ad
shown the possibility of misinterpretation.
Mr. HOLLOWAY (Union of South Africa), supported by Mr. BENDA
(Covazehoslkia), stressed that no issue of substance had been raisenddnd, a
thommie Ce seemed to be spending valuable time in the discussion of minor
drafting matters.
MrHERERT, (Canada) felt that if the word"" mprovementf owag "eferew
retained. "wages" would require some qualification sucsh"as a measured by
chpurnasig pow.er"-
Mr.UHY CHO TERRA (Uruguay) opposed the suggestion of thaerm Chian to
refer the new textof the Article back to the Sub-Committeie whch had
performed a magnificent task and had taken all presvioue amndments into
account.
M- .QEETSqU (uba), supported by Colombiana Wdthe Netherlasnd
referring to tChe r hnaima' s suggestion that the tehoxt suld be referred back
to the Sub-Committee for study, felt that a dangerous precedent would
thereby be established. The text submitted by the Summb-Coittee was a
/ccpiromseo E/CONF.2/C.1/SR.8 Page 4
compromise solution reached after long and difficult discussion.
Mr.SHACKIE (United Kingdom) explaind that his delegation would have
been ready to accept the new proposed text, hed not the discussion Shown
certain small defects. He felt that the Sub-Committee should. re-examine
the text, on the understanding that such study should be limited to the
points on which the present discussion had concentrated.
Mr. HOLLOWAY (Union of South Africa) stated that if the proposed text
was to be further studied by the Sub-Committee, his delegation would ask
to be excused from Sub-Committee.
Mr. MULLER (Chile) thought that no limit should be placed on the
right of delegates to express their views in the full Committee.
Mr. RRESQUET (Cuba) agreed that the right of a Committee to discuss
the report of a Sub-Committee should not be limited and he explained that
his earlier remarks concerning the creation of an unfortunate precedent
related to the suggestion that the question be referred back to the
Sub-Comttee. . -
Rr.ER1OYM nce(Fra), supported by the eUnKtd Zomngdc and Bazil,
Proposed that the text agreed upon by the Sub-Committee should be referred
to the Central DraftCng Qommittee, since there seemed to be general
agreement on points of substance. It could then be referred back to the
full Committee for a final reading.
tejlyto g b a question by tHhIRMANe CM as to whether t her an-a~ry
Opposition to the suggestion for the text to be submitted to thn Celtra4
DraftingmCom:ittMe, BEN. }3DA (Czechosloavaki) agreed, on undee,-vrdingstanS
that a wnotewould be circulated showing the various points of exprisew resed.
HAIRMANMs attted that the views expressed would appear in the-
maS~ary Record of the meeting.
Peplying to a question by thHe CAANIRM as to whether the po raisedOd.
by the representative of Belgium could appropriately be sent to thraf D ting
Committee for study, Mr. van HILEiE=N (Belgium) replied in the afmative.e.
Heplying to a request for clarification by Mr.ULLERIT (Chile),
Mr.HOURY CORRTEA (Uruguay) felt that Article 4 rpemitted a countr wy,ith
the approval of t heOrganization, to ta kemeasures against the importation
of goods produced under unfair labour conditions through t heprocedure of
Article 90. ..
ANThe CAMWA pressed, certain doubts as to whether the Central:
DrCoamfting ,mittee, in viewlim of its ited functions (dEoCONFcu/ment /.217),
would be in a position to examine the Sub-C'ommittees text and because
Committee I was unable to provide suffuicanceient gid at the present stage.
He proposed the reading of the Article, sentence by sentence.
/MrL U"
. .. . . . ... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E/CONF.2/C .1/SR.8
Page 5
Mul. LIEU (China) felt that j4d be better to restrict discussion to
points of substance, leaving the Central Drafting Committee to study minor
drafting questions. Referring to points raised by Chile and Turkey, he
explained that the Sub-C=itee's text was based on the assumption that no
other country could, oar was obliged to, eliminte unfair conditions in the
territory of another State.
Mr. MULLM hile), having stated that the explanation of the
representative of China appeared to be contrary to that of Uruguay, Mr. ROYER
(France) emphiasized that in Geneva t had been understood that the
comitments under Article 4 referred to the obligation of one State to
remedy inequitable labour conditions prevailing within its territory.
FRESQUETOWAAfrica), and MREr. FMSQUET (Cufba), guly
supported the representative of China.
A consensus of opinion was then taken on the suggested amendments to
Article 1, sentence by sen.tence
First sentence
The Committee decided to retain the first sentence as it stood.
Second sentence
The Committee decided to retain the second sentence as it stood.
Third sentence
Mr. ROYER (France) having suggested that the words "within its territory"
should be placed after the word "conditions" at the end of the sentence,
Mr.KIEk SHA (United Kingdom) and MrLl. MUER (Chile) agreed.
The Committee approved the third sentence as modified by the proposal of
France.
The Committee rose at 1..20 pm. |
GATT Library | gp657jt4861 | Summary Record of the Eighth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 11 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 11, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 11/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.8 and E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gp657jt4861 | gp657jt4861_90190222.xml | GATT_155 | 2,347 | 15,316 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTEDEiMCTED
I/COF. 2/C. 3/SRl8
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 1 l Decermber 1947
ON DU ORIGIENGLISHGLIS
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
D COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICYLICY
ARY RECORD OF THE EIGHTH MEETING ING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 11 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. D. IIL. WGRESS (Canada)
DISCUSSION OF ARTICLE 16 (Continued)
The CHAIRMAN stated the Revised Annotated Agenda for Chapter IV
ONE/CCF.2/C.3/6) would henceforth be the Comittee's working paper. The
representative of Cuba had submitted an amendment to Article 16, which
appeared to come under Section E and should be discussed in that context.
Mr. ILLAMMIA (Cuba) had no objection, but reserved the right to raise the
matter again under Article 16 if the discussion should not produce a
satisfactory result.
To a question raised by the representative of Czechoslovakia, the.
RMHAIMAN stated that the Italian amendment to Article 16 would, be referred
to jthe oint sub-committee ofmi Comttees II and III; should Czechoslovakia
not be represented on that subm-comittee, It should request permission to
present its views.
DSISUION OF ARTICLE 17
The discrepancy between the French andn Eglish text of Article 17
(I (d)) noted by the representative of Venezuela wou ldbe referredotq the
Central Drafting mme ittee; in the meantime, the English wording should be
used.
With regard to the substantive point raised by the representative of
Venezuela, theHAIRMAN C thought it might be helpful to make a few remarks
concerning the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade: Part I contained.
the general most-favoured-natno4 clause (corresponding to Article 16 of
the Draft Charter) and Article II referring to the tariff concessions.
Part II contained those Articles common to both the Draft Cratter and. the
General Agreement concerning quantitative restrictions, internal taxation
and other measures to protect the tariff concessions. Part III-makes
provision for entry into force of the General Agreement, amendment,-
consultation, et cetera. ArticlXe XIX defined the relationship of the
General Agreement to the Charter, Articles XXI X tXXXo III for withdrawal,
membership, and accession, respectively.
o/Dcument E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.8
Page 2
Document E/CONF.2/C.3/12 which classified the various proposals would
be used in the discussion of Article 17.
Mr. SUETENS (Belgium) reserving the right to speak to the amendments
in detail later, thought he might alleviate certain doubts concerning
Article 17 evinced by the number of amendments submitted thereto,
The General Agreement had been signed by a group of countries
representative of all types of economies. The concessions granted had been
approved by all the signatories which included developed as well as
under-developed countries. The Agreement had altered the shapes of many
tariff structures which was an important and unprecedented achievement. The
General Agreement appeared to take account of most of the points in the
amendments submitted.
The amendments could be divided into three groups: those desiring to
secure development, those designed to protect the source of fiscal revenue,
and those aiming at recognition of the right to adjust tariffs in the case
of currency depreciation.
The present Draft Charter and the procedures and practice leading to
the General Agreement should cover the questions raised by those three types
of amendments. However, the text might be further clarified by certain
re-drafting If that were thought necessary.
Mr. SAHLIN (Sweden) thought Article 17 was just and wise. The
provisions in paragraph 1 (b) under which the binding of low tariffs was
recognized as equivalent to the substantial reduction of high tariffs met
the case of Sweden which had generally not raised tariffs since the first
World War. The incidence of these tariffs had further been reduced by
the rise in prices, He was in full agreement with the intrepretation as
given by the delegate of Australia of the negotiations procedure.
Mr. LLERAS (Colombia) took exception to the attitude that these amendments
might be superfluous. Would a country be free not to negotiate certain
items it considered essential in view of the obligation of making "substantial
reductions"? Would the Committee recognize formally that each country was
free to abstian from negotiating substantial reductions of tariffs on
certain items in which they had an interest? If this were unanimously
agreed upon, it would be an important step to understanding, and would
facilitate future discussions. Even then, however, the phrase "substantial
reductions" needed clarification. The problem was how practically to link
the freedom to refrain from negotiations with the obligation to make
substantial reductions. That was to be judged by the Tariff Committee,
which might decide a country had not fulfilled its obligations under the
Charter in that respect. Would not the right not to negotiate on certain
items conflict with the obligation to negotiate for substantial reductions?
/The Draft Charter E/CONF.2/C. 3/SR.8
Page 3
The Draft Charter was not - so perfectly worded that it could not be: re-drafted
to express clearly that countries have the right to protect their industries
by reasonable tariffs.
The CHAIRMAN stated that negotiations under-Article.17 were on a
selective basis; a country may state it is not willing to grant concessions
on a particular product. That, of course, would effect the negotiations
with other countries: the more products a country refused to negotiate, the
fewer concessions it would secure from the others.
Mr. STUCXII -(Switzerland) stated that the incidence of the Mass tariff
protection of 16 per cent in 1921 had today fallen to 8 per cent, and agreed
with the representative of Sweden that Article 17 provided wisely that
binding of low tariffs was equivalent to a reduction of high tariffs.- The
spirit motivating the negotiations at Geneva was conducive to accepting the
provisions of Article 17.
However, tariffs were not the major obstacles: these were- quotas and
exchange restrictions, Article 17 contained the obligation to eliminate
preferences. Many speakers in Committee III had stated that the Conference
and the Draft Charter were in favour of preferences; this was disproved by
Article 17.
Mr. SAENZ (Mexico) stated that Article 17 should expressly -include
safeguards for small nations which were demanded by many of the amendments;
if they were implicit in the text, there was no-reason why they should not
be stated- expressly. The grave defect of Articles 1 and 17 was their ;
emphasis on the reduction of tariffs as an objective in itself, whereas- it
was only a 'means to an end. Article 17 should be modified. so as to recognize
the right of countries to protect their development and to approach the-
reduction of tariffs only as a means -to expanding world trade and raising the
standard of living. The immediate reduction of tariffs could -lead to a
short expansion of world trade but would destroy the purchasing power -of
small countries.
Mr. CORLU (Turkey) found nothing in Article. 17 contrary to the needs
and requirements of the Turkish economy although this was -in the first stage
of development. The drafting and spirit of that Article gave full
satisfaction to the wishes expressed in the various amendments; even though
minor drafting changes were conceivable, a greater understanding of the-
present drafting should. lead to its acceptance. -
Mr. BRIGNOLI (Argentina) 'supported the remarks of the representative of
Cuba that each country- had a right to refuse to negotiate on items in which
it had a particular interest.'
Mr. '- ' Z '''uay - ' /*.-GONZALE (UrugWN) E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.8 Page 4
Mr. GONZALEZ (Uruguay), referring to the amendment submitted by his
delegation, said that Article 17 should be so, drafted as to leave to Members
of the Organization the option of initiating negotiations.
Mr. CHAVEZ (Peru) fully supported the amendments to Article 17 proposed by
various delegations as the present wording of. that Article was far from clear.
Referring to the remarks of the representative, of Switzerland, he
:considered that negotiations referring to tariff reductions and those
referring to elimination of preferences should be treated separately.
Mr. AROSEMENA (Vice-President, speaking as the representative of Ecuador),
supported the remarks of the representative of Colombia. Thirty-six countries
had made reservations regarding preferential systems, and it could truthfully
be said that the Committee, by a large majority, agreed with those
reservations. Article 17 should be drafted in clear and precise terms in
order that it might not be wrongly interpreted at a future date.
Mr. CASTILLA (El Salvador) agreed with the opinions expressed by the
representatives of Colombia, Uruguay and Mexico. Paragraph 1 of. Article 17
as at present drafted placed an obligation upon members of ITO to enter
into negotiations at the request of the Organization. Should that obligation
not be carried out, steps might be taken by the Organization which would,
in fact, amount to sanctions. His delegation, therefore, had submitted an
amendment which would protect the smaller countries.,
Referring to the remarks of the representative of Switzerland regarding
preferences, Mr. Castilla stressed that in the Central American countries
preferences were an absolute necessity.
Mr. ROYER (France) agreed with those representatives who had pointed out
that the text of the Charter was not perfect, and considered that certain
questions would have to be clarified.
Referring to. the remarks of the representative of Uruguay, he. said that
a certain number of States had already carried out tariff negotiations which
would, enter into force provisionally, and. which applied to countries playing
an important part in international trade.
The Preparatory Committee- in Geneva had felt it imperative that tariff
negotiations should be centralized, and the Geneva text provided that at
the end of those negotiations a committee representating all the members.
taking part -in the negotiations would examine the Agreement. At that time
it would be possible to arbitrate and settle decisions regarding certain
countries, those of Central America for instance. An attempt had been made
to lay down such a procedure in paragraph 2 of Article 17. . -
Referring to the remarks of the representative of SwitzerlanMd, r. Royer
said-that the Preptraiory CimmIttee fully understood that the reduction of
customs tariffs would nomme i-diately increase the volume of internanaltio
/trade E/CONF.2/C. 3/SR. 8
Page 5
trade as there were other barriers which restricted that trade.
The Draft Charter left an important point not clarified - if new
preferences were approved by the Organization would they, or would they not,
be subject to elimination through negotiation? Mr. Royer considered, and
he felt the representative of Argentina would support him, that it was
indispensable to uphold the rule that they would be subject to such
elimination.
Referring to the General Agreement, he pointed out that it would not
prevent a country from revaluing its specific duties in the case of monetary
deflation. It would therefore not serve any purpose to insert such a
provision in the Charter.
Mr. DUNAWAY (Liberia) agreed with the remarks made at a previous meeting
by the representatives of Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States
of America. No other feature of the Charter would contribute so much to the
betterment of world economy as would the reduction of tariffs and the
elimination of preferences, etc. The General Agreement was the most concrete
constructive step yet taken to improve world economy.
Liberia had no preference system and her products were admitted free of
duty by consuming countries; her import duties were for revenue only. He
agreed with the principle of Article 17, but the provision on preferences
was not strong enough.
Mr. GONZALEZ (Uruguay) said that his delegation could not agree that.
power should be given to the IT0 to oblige Number States to initiate
negotiations and to carry them out. It therefore maintained the amendments
which it had submitted.
Mr. ? (Maxico) felt that the representative of France had
misinterpreted one of the proposals submitted by the Mexican delegation. The
amendment proposed by that delegation did not suggest the elimination from
the Charter of the principle of reciprocity and mutual advantage in tariff
negotiations. The ? amendment also referred to the problem of the
decrease in the purchasing power of national currency and that problem had not
yet been provided for in the Charter.
2. PROGRAMME OF FUTURE MEETINGS
The CHAIRMAN said that the debate on Article 17 would be closed at
the following meeting. The various proposals would then be referred to the
sub-committee together with proposals regarding Article 16 which had not been
referred to the Joint sub-committee of the Committees II and III.
Committee III would be divided into two parts: Part A would deal with
Articles 16, 17, 18 and 19 and 32 to 43; Part B would deal with Articles 20
to 31 inclusive. That would enable the Third Committee to take up the
complicated questions of quantitative restrictions and balance of payments
/at an E/CONF.2 /C. 3/SR.8
Page 6
at an earlier date. The Committee would meet as Committee A on Friday
afternoon and as Committee B on Saturday afternoon.
Mr. STUCKI (Switzerland) withdrew the reservation he had made at a
previous meeting, and supported the Chairman's proposal.
Mr. GONZALEZ (Uruguay) also supported the Chairman's proposal.
The CHAIRMAN, replying to a question put by the representative of
Argentina, said that Committees A and B would not meet at the same time,
although he could not make any definite promise to that effect. The
General Committee would decide that matter.
Mr. d'ASCOLI (Venezuela) supported the Chairman's proposal. It might,.
however, be necessary for his delegation to ask for instructions from its
Government on some questions, and with the new plan of work certain Articles
might be dealt with before those instructions arrived. . The delegation of
Venezuela.Would, therefore, have to take a provisional attitude in some of
the discussions.
Mr. CASTILIA (E1 Salvador) pointed out that his delegation consisted of
two representatives. It would therefore be difficult for E1 Salvador to
follow meeitings if Committees A and B met at the same time. He could not
support the Chairman's proposal.
Mr. MELANDER (Norway) supported the Chairmans proposal.
The CHAIRMAN felt that there was general agreement with the procedure he
had suggested. There were 290 items on the agenda, for Chapter IV, and a
greater number of Committee meetings would have to be held if the work was to
be finished in time.
The meeting rose at 1.10 p.m. |
GATT Library | gy963xh3529 | Summary Record of the Eighth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba on Tuesday, 16 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 17, 1947 | Second Committee: Economic Development | 17/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.8 and E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.1-17 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gy963xh3529 | gy963xh3529_90180445.xml | GATT_155 | 2,982 | 19,226 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.8
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 17 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE EIGHTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba on Tuesday, 16 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. ABELLO (Philippines)
CONTINUATION OF CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER III (E/.CONF.2/C.2/9)
Chilean Proposal for the addition of a paragraph to follow present
paragraph 3 of A ticle 12 (E/CONF.2/C.2/9 bottom of page 20 and top of page 21)
The CHAIRMAN drew attention to the close relationship which existed
between this amendment and paragraphs 1 (a) (vi) and 2 of the Colombian
proposal for a new Article 12 A. The latter proposal had been referred to
the Joint Sub-Committee, and if there were no objections, the Chilean
amendment could be treated in a similar manner.
Mr. Garcia OLDINI (Chile) was unable to accept the procedure suggested
by the Chairman. The Colombian amendment had a more limited objective than
his own and it could be as easily asserted that it related to the Chilean
proposal as vice-versa. His proposal should first be discussed in the full
Committee, and then it could be seen to what extent the two proposals could
be amalgamated.
After a short discussion, it was agreed that the Chilean amendment
be referred to the Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and VI.
Costa Rican proposal for the addition of a Paragraph 4 to Article 12.
Mr. TINOCO (Costa Rica) said that undeniably disequilibrium existed
with respect to the world's financial resources. No blame could be attached
in that regard, and it was fortunate that the United States had accumulated
the economic potential which permitted it to assist war devastated and
underdeveloped countries. The concentration of financial resources, however,
had an undesirable effect on markets and prices, and impeded the development
of other countries.
The problem of re-investment had been solved by the United Kingdom
in the last century and it now had to be faced by the United States. Foreign
investment was being held up, principally because of the practice of double
taxation which deprived enterprises of legitimate profits.
/To bring E/CONF.2/C.2/SR .8
Page 2
To bring about a rise in the standard of living in Latin America, it
was necessary that there should be an increase in the per capita national
income, and to effect that, there had to be a current of foreign investment.
The problems of investment and double taxation, thus, wore intimately related
and had been studied by the League of Nations. A League report of the end
of 1943, had put forward the view that double taxation was the main obstacle
to the foreign investment of capital.
It was essential that ITO should do more than study and make
recommendations concerning this question; the adoption of the Costa Rican
proposal would make for a definitive solution.
It was decided that the Joint Sub-Conmittee of Committees II and VI
would consierd the Costa Rican amendment in connection with the new
Article 12 A proposed by Colombia.
Italian,Chilean and Uruguayan Amendments to first sentence of paragraph 1
of Article 11
The CHARlMAN, in an effort to expedite the work of the Committee,
suggested that these amendments might be referred to the Joint Sub-Committee
without preliminary general discussion. In view of objections the suggestion
was withdrawn.
Mr. FARINA (Uruguay) pointed out that his amendment would benefit
countries with a surplus or with a scarcity of manpower. The omission of
a reference to technology, which was included in paragraph 2, had been
remedied. As no good would result from having access to markets unless
there existed the necessary transport facilities, reference to such
facilities had also been included.
Mr. D'ANNA (Italy) said that the manpower aspect of the question under
discussion was of great importance to his country. If no care were taken
to solve manpower problems, the task of ITO would never be fulfilled.
Mr. COOMBS (Australia) supported by Mr. RUBIN (United States of America)
drew attention to the difference between the Italian and Uruguayan amendments
and that put forward by the Chilean delegation. The former dealt with
technical requirements which were necessary for the production and
transportation of goods, while the latter introduced a type of requirements
with which Article 11 was not concerned.
He accepted the references to transport facilities and manpower and
hoped that the Sub-Committee would distinguish between the Chilean and the
other amendments.
Mr. Garcia OLDINI (Chile) expressed the view that it was difficult to
separate facilities which would make for production, and
facilities which would make that production of value in the effort
/to gain higher E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.8
Page 3
to gain higher standards of living. Theoretically, it was easy to define.
what constituted technical means to production, but in practice, the two
aspects formed a whole. He insisted on the substance of his amendment,
though he did not feel strongly with respect to which Article of the Charter
it would be attached. -
The three amendments were referred to the Joint Subm-tCeo. miteThe
Chairman drew the attention of the Josuint mb-Comittee to the Australian
and Chilean statements.
Article 11, paragaph 1, second sentence: amendment propose by Mexico
(pagef 6 oO E/CNF.2/C.2/9)
NMr. OVOA (Mexico) stated that the purpose of the Mexican amendment
to wmak eto provisions of the paragraph positive instead of negative
and more precise. The present paragraph implied that obstacles could be
ipmosed If they e emed reasonable. The text could be worded differently
provided it was affirmative.
r. TORRES SBraMilr supported the Mexican amendment and. oped that
it could be re-drafted appropriately in sub-committee, keeping in mind
the Agreement of Chapultepec, which provided for the same freedom of
access to machinery and technical skills as to raw materials.
Mr. RUBIN (United States) said that although he heartily agreed with
the Mexican amendment from the point of view of making more positive
the obligations regarding economic development , he felt that the proposal
would eliminate a certain balance which had been achieved in the previous
text of Article 11, it introduced affirmative language in paragraph 1, but
did not apply the same principle to paragraph 2.
The amendment was referred to the Jmmittee oiont Sub-Cmittee oof Co IIImitteesIXI
and VI. .
New.rticle 11 A proposed by Chile (pages 12 anCONF.d 1.3/ o.f E/2/C,9)
HARNMr. Garcia OLDINI (Chile) referring to a suggeHAIRMANstion by the C
did not think it-appropriate to refer paragraph 3 (a) of the New Article
to either the Committee dealing with Chapter IV or that dealing with
Chapt VI. It would be better first to consider the Article as awhole
in Committee II. .
The representative of Chile pointed out that the New Article had
been -drawn up as a nzan o protect the underdeveloped countries from
current economic crises through which they had suffered particularly from
a lack of diversification of industrial production. Agreements among States
/were not E/CONF. 2/C.2/SR.8
Page 4
were not sufficient to ensure the elimination of unwarranted disparities
between the prices of raw materials and the prices of manufactured products,
and he believed that patents should ultimately belong to the ITO which
would reserve the right to protect them.
Mr. IGONET (France) stated that although France would wish to participate
in developing the latent resources of under-developed countries, she was
not in a position at present to undertake any positive obligation in this
respect, as the reconstruction of France was of necessity her prior concern,
and she herself could be classed among the economically under-developed
rather than the well-developed countries, both at home and in her territories
overseas.
Mr. RUBIN (United States) wished to avoid the distinction set by Chile
between under-developed and adequately developed countries. He pointed
out that even in his country there were certain branches of industry which
needed development.
He shared the views expressed by France regarding the absolute
commitment which would be undertaken under paragraph 1 of the Chilean
amendment. are believed that the words "by all means in their powers"
would have to be qualified in some way.
He hoped that Chile would not insist on the inclusion of paragraph 2
of the New Article, as it would impose an absolute obligation on one country
to supply credits merely upon the request of another country. Although the
United States had been glad to supply certain credits for industrial
development, she would not be inclined to assume an obligation of this
sort at the present Conference or if written into a document such as the
Charter. He believed industrial development could be facilitated as
if not more by the investment of private capital.
Mr. OLDINI (Chile) said he understood the point of view of
the representative of the United States, but felt that the Charter should
recognize the reality of the world being divided into industrialized
rich countries and countries industrially underdeveloped. It would be absurd
to pretend that the needs of the two groups were the same. Encouragement of
new industries, in the latter countries, would not be charity but
/would save E/CONF.2/C.2/SR .8
Page 5
would save the whole world from suffering caused through their
underdevelopment. They should have special treatment which would not be
extended to countries economically powerful. This matter should be stated
clearly in the Charter. Although willing to make changes, if requested, in
paragraph 2, the Representative of Chile insisted that the substance should
remain the same.
Mr. FRESQUET (Cuba) sympathized both with the amendment of Chile and with
the point raised by France.
It was decided to refer Article 11A to the Joint Sub-Committee of the
Second and Sixth Committee.
Additions to Paragraph 2 of Article 10 (page 3 of E/CONF.2/C.2/9) and to
paragraph 1 of Article11 (Pages 6 and 7) proposed respectively by Turkey
and China. (Also E/CONF.2/C.2/11)
Mr. LIEU (China) in reply to a question by the CHAIRMAN in referring to
a telegram of 9 December from the International Bank, said that the Chinese
amendment did not mean specifically that the ITO should make a recommendation
to the Bank for a particular amount of money to be loaned to any country, and
therefore it was not necessary for him to withdraw his proposal. The Bank
had no technical staff to make studies of conditions, but would only consider
an application for a loan if very detailed plans were submitted.
Recommendations could be made by the ITO on the basis of expert advice to which
the Bank had no other access.
In reply to a question by the CHAIRMAN, Mr. DENEL (Turkey) stated that he
did not wish to withdraw his amendment, as it took full cognizance of the
statement of the International Bank and the Agreement between the Bank and the
United Nations. He felt it would contribute towards the economic development
of backward countries and was in accordance with Article 84 which provided
for co-operation between the specialized agencies of which ITO was one.
Mr. RUBIN (United States) thought the Chinese and Turkish amendments
conflicted with the substance of the telegram, and did not feel that it would
be helpful to the activities of the Bank for the amendments to be included in
the Charter. He referred to paragraph 2 of Article 10 regarding the furnishing
of facilities to members by the Organization in co-operation with other
inter-governmental organizations, and was in favour of retaining the wording
as drafted at Geneva. E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.8
Page 6
Mr. DENEL (Turkey) endorsed the statement of the Representative of
United States, and said that he would be prepared to redraft his amendment
before submission to the Joint Sub-Committee.
The Chinese and Turkish amendments were referred to the Joint
Sub-Committee of Committees Il and VI
Article 11, paragraph 2: amendments proposed by Burma, Norway, Chile and
Mexico (pages 8 and 9 of E/CONF.2/C.2/9)
Mr. NOVOA (Mexico) explained that the Mexican proposal was to delete
Pesent Paagraphc 2 and substituteb a new text whih was close in sustance
to present peagraph 3.
Mr NYUN (Burma) stated that the intention of his country was not to
give better treatment to foreign investment, but equal treatment, and this
should sufficiently safeguard the interests of other members proposing to
make investments in unerdeveloped countries. Burma was willing to invite
foreign capital, but objected to the words "unreasonable or unjustifiable"
in conjunction with the words 'njurious to the rights or interests of
nationals" because, it was difficult to know who should judge in such cases.
Mr. SKAUG (Norway) said that his delegation would consider whether it
would be possible to withdraw his amendment in view of a similar amandment
by nd Zealand to Article 12. He assumed that he would be called upon to
present the Norwegian view-point to the Sub-Committee.
Mr.Garcia OLDINI (Chile) stated that the Chilean amendment has been
made to insure the supply and the exchange of ihe facilities for industrial
and general economic development, as it often occurred that exceptional
situation or situations promoted artificially made supply impossible. He
cited his country as an example of one of the under-developed countries
Which had suffered in this way. He hoped the Committee would study his
amendments in close relation to other amendments of the Charter to prevent
Mr. COOMBS (Australia) found the Burmese amendment unacceptable, his
main objection being to the obligation not to discriminate against foreign
capital. Australia would wish to reserve the right to discriminate against
foreign capital if for political reasons the goverment considered this
necessary. Article12 preserved this right and also the right to take over
foreign-owned enterprises. These right Australia believed to be fundamental.
The representative of Australia disagreed with the Chilean amendwent and would
not bae prepared no give ary country a prior clim on any goods merely because
it was a large buyer.
Mr. TORRES (Brazil) supported the Chilean amendment,
Mr. Garcia Oldinile) said that the Australian
represvVentative had expressed certain misgings concerning the
Sgessin that priority s0ehould be reserved as regards the sadng of
/certain goods E/CONF. 2/C.2/SR .8
Page 7
certain goods to certain countries. The present Conference, however, was
attempting to establish an organization which would prevent unnecessary
crises and there certainly would be instances where such crises could be
avoided by supplying a country with the minimum quantity of goods necessary
for its economic survival.
Perhaps the Burmese and Chilean amendments could be redrafted, but at
the present time it would not be possible for his delegation to accept as
mandatory in the Charter, the enactment of special legislation concerning
the allocation of scarce materials and the fixing of maximum prices. He
therefore reserved the position of his delegation concerning the discussions
on this question in the Sub-Committee.
The CHAIRMAN said that the discussion had shown that it might be possible
to get approval of a re-drafted version of these amendments and they would be
referred to the Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and VI
Mexican and Afghan Amendments to Paragraph 3 of Article 11
It was agreed at the suggestion of the Chairman, supported By Mr. NOVOA
(Mexico) to postpone the discussion of the Mexican amendment Until
Article 12, paragraph 3, came before the Committee for consideration.
Mr. AZIZ (Afghanistan) drew attention to the insuperable obstacles with
which his country had been faced at the end of the war with respect to
obtaining the necessary technical assistance for the promotion of a greater
economic development. ITO could be of great help as regards that problem.
The amendment proposed by Afghanistan was referred to the Joint
Sub-Comoittee of Committees II and VI.
Peruvian Proposal for the Insertion of a new Paragraph Between Paragraphs 2
and 3 of Article 11
Sr. MONGE (Peru) said that the basic principles of Article 11
paragraph 1, were of sufficient importance to be able to bring about the
promotion of economic development, but the Article also should lay dwvn a
procedure to implement the provisions. Articles 89 and 90 set forth coercive
measures which could be applied to recalcitrant members, but not all of
those measures were efficient nor would they need to be applied in certain
cases. To turn the principles concerning economic development into practical
measures some simple procedure such as that proposed was needed.
Mr. IGONET (France) felt that the proposal was a reasonable one and
deserved the consideration of the Joint Sub-Cmmnittee of Committees II and
VI.
Mr. RUBIN (United States of America) recalled that in the opinion of
the legal experts in Geneva, the provisions of Chapter VIII applied to all
parts of the Charter and did not require specific mention on each occasion.
/Mexican Amendment E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.8
Page 8
Mexican Amendment to Paragraph 4 of Article 11
The Mexican proposal was to delete present paragraph 4 and substitute
a new text. The proposal was referred to the Joint Sub-Committee of
Committees II and VI subject to the right of the representative of Mexico
to speak regarding the proposed deletion during the discussion of Article 12
to which the present text in part related.
Composition of the Joint Sub-Committee of the Second and Sixth Committees
It was agreed that the United Kingdom and Brazil should be added as
members of the Sub-Committee.
Proposal for a Joint Sub-Committee of the Second and Third Committees. .
(E/CODI/C.2/14)
TIRMANheaA CA nnounced thtat theMmmhitrd Cnitepe had. roposed the creation
of a Joicnt Sub-eommitte to consider Artic les 15,a16 (2) nd (3), and 42.
rbGarcia OLDINI (Chile) expressed the view that half the representatives
eon th Smub-Comittee should be nominated by the Second and halfbyt the hird
Committee, otherwise, there would be no point in calling it a Joint
oSubCmmittee, - - -
rks The CHAIRM promised that he would be guided by the reqv> f the
ile than re#rienative in connection wit the establishment of.,boint
Sx -C sew age.w A agrs no opposition to the idea had boe, zprefqd,i vasee
ehane a Joinrence as t Sub Comittee would be created with terms of rer 5s set
out in VCONF.2/ 2/4.
Thexetingrose at 8.05 p.m. |
GATT Library | gy160nb6973 | Summary Record of the Eleventh Meeting : Held at Lake Success on 1 February 1947, at 10:30 a.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 1, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 01/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/34 and E/PC/T/C.6/21-36/ADD.1 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gy160nb6973 | gy160nb6973_90230078.xml | GATT_155 | 1,491 | 9,770 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/34
AND ECONOMIQUE
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLYOMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE ELEVENTH MEETING
Held at lake Success on 1 February 1947, at 10:30 a.m.
Chairman: H.E. M. Eric Colban
The CHIRMAN referred to the amendment to paragraph .3(d) of Article 26,
proposed by the Belgian Delegation (C.6/W.34).
Messrs. SMITH (Canada) and LEDDY (United States) agreed to this
amendment.
Mr. PHILLIPS (Australia) could not accept the amendment which he
considered a substantial change in the London. text. Should it be adopted
he would have to reserve the position of his Governament.
M. JUSSIANT (Belgium) explained that the damage caused by the application
of import restrictions might be so widespread as to require a spontaneous
action of the Organization.
M. LEOUYER (France) considered that the Organization should not be
called upon to intervene in matters which should. be settled between the
Members. If accepted France would reserve its position on the amendment.
Messrs. WHITE (New Zealand) and MA (China) were of the same opinion
as M. Lecuyer.
The Committee decided to approve Article 26 in its present wording
with the Belgian amendment as an alternative text.
The CHAIRMAN moved the second reading of Articles 29, 30 and 31.
Article 29 (C.6/24) was approved in second reading .
Article 30 (C.6/24). On page 4,. line 13 the word "interest" should read
, "interests", and in line 16 the words "interest is" should read "interests
are".
/The Article E/PC/T/C.6/34
Page 2
The Article was approved in second reading, after Mr. SMITH had
referred to his previous suggestion to delete the whole of Paragraph 4(b).
Article 31. The Chairman introduced the discussion of Paragraph 3 and
suggested the following wording:
"The Article shall apply to any enterprise, organ or agency
whose trading operations are exercised directly by a Member
government or by virtue of special or exclusive privileges
granted to the enterprise." Mr. SMITH agreed to this text.
In the discussion of the United States amendment concerning the words
"Government is in a position to exercise effective control", objections
were raised by Messrs. PHILLIPS (Australia) ALVAREZ (Chile) and BAYER
(Czechoslovakia). They wished that the London text, which represented a
definition agreed upon after long discussions, should be restored. Any
amendment should be considered. as an alternative draft.
Mr. BAYER pointed out that no government could be sure if it is
"in a position" to exercise control. This may be a political question.
Mr. HAKIM (Lebanon) suggested that the language in square brackets
in Paragraph 1 be transferred to Article 3 to which M. JUSSIANT and
Mr. WHITE agreed.
Mr. BAYER pointed out that his objections were directed to the words
"in a position" which could be interpreted in a too wide sense and that he
therefore could not agree to the Lebenese suggestion. He was anxious to
find a solution to this matter which was of great importance to his
government. Perhaps some more concise wording could be found.
Mr. WHITE contended that the words "is in a position to exercise"
extend the scope of the definition unduly and that he therefore supported.
Mr. Bayerts objections
Mr. LEDDY suggested. that the Paragraph should be referred to the
Legal Drafting Sub-Committee with the words "is in a position to" in
square brackets.
/MR. FRESQUET (Cuba) E/PC/T/C.6/34
Page 3
Mr. FRESQUET (Cuba) supported this suggestion.
Mr. SHACKLE (United KIingdom) suggested to simplify the issue by .
transferring the words in brackets in Paragraph 1 to Paragraph 3. With regard
to the substance of the matter he bad no instructions from his government.
The CHAIRMAN suggested that the Delegations of United States and
Czechoslovakia should meet and attempt to reach a solution which might be
suggested to the Legal Drafting Sub-Committee. Pending this, the Committee
agreed to peas provisionally the following text, with the words in square
brackets representing an alternative version:
3. "This Article shall apply to any enterprise, organ or agency
in whose trading operations a government [is in a position
to exercise] exercises effective control by virtue of the
special or exclusive -privileges granted to the enterprise."
Messrs. LEDDY and.BAYER declared themselves willing to discuss the
matter.
Paragraph 1. In view of the above new -wording of Paragraph 3, the words in
square brackets in lines 5 and 6 were deleted.
Paragraph 2. Mr. SMITH stated that in his opinion it was decided in the
ninth meeting that the words "or use in the production of goods for sale"
in line 3 and line 4 should be included (twice) in the tentative draft in
square brackets.
Mr. SHACKLE supported this view.
Messrs. ALVAREZ and 1Z'E reserved the position of their Goverments
on the Canadian amendment.
On the suggestion of Mr. Smith the following change was approved in
Article 34 Paragraph 1 (C.6/28): the words "with respect to a preference"
in square brackets should be followed by the following words:. "is being
imported under such conditions as to cause or threat -serious injury.".
/The CHAIRMAN E/PC/T/C .6/34
Page 4
The CHAIRMAN moved the first reading of
Article 38. Territorial Applications of chapter V- Customs Unions -,-
Frontier Traffic: -- -_ -.':
Patph3laprove;-
PraAea~srah 2. 'W. ALMAEZ antroducew an)enment to thli Paragreph (C.6/V.384
and referre . to panar,-ph 5:b(i) an page 11 of the Lo:don Repot.
1r.I:D posed the menmnt because it would. enable two or more
countries to grrteach other preferoences nwithout definitely ccmittirg
temselves to the conclusions of a customs union. He pointed. out that the
3annuaGe in Part IT of the London report would. cover the case of the
Be3Zian-Netheranci customs union.
*rL Sdy agreed- vith Mr. Iedcl.
lb. A=AFM pointe& out thatoChile is nt present ccnsolidatirg its
commercial relations viwh Argentina and Peru thich must be done in stages.
cp, H-M w= expressed sym.athy,rith the Chilean point of view but felt
that there waH a. dancer of abusommitBe asked. if the 'Cc=ttee, could.
TCo ndIts report a time limiLt to he formation -of th customs union.
Mr. BA :voie. to Luppy't M. leddtnzs-opiggnon ad. str.este. that.. the
Oal GignizationL-wet be-empoered. to examine the circumstances and. decide
cfs it is acaeof a genuine union.
I JUSSATxpained that only her tlere isa definite decision of
the Govennmerts orm fc= a union can garaGraph 2(b) be applied.. It is not
admissible that countries extend.preferences to each other and. decide
later if or not a customs union be formed. . .
Lr. FSJBT pointed out. thsaa initusl .ptpes m=xv be zonduciTe-to a
sdion if thit Paragraph should, apply. - . -
M. LECU st=estel that a language similar to that in page 11 of
the Lbnddo Report could be adopte&ass an.cfficial .interpretation of the
Paragraph.
Air. EEfY E/PC/T/C .E/34
.Page 5
Mr. LEDDY stressed that a declaration of intention to form a union
was not sufficient to ensure the application of Paragraph 2(b).
After further discussion in .which the Delegates for Lebanon, Brazil,
Frence, Australia and South Africa took part, the Chilean amendment was
not acceptable to the Committee . The CHAIRMAN ruled that Mr. Alvarez might,
if he wished to, submit an alternative draft to the Legal Drafting
Sub-Committee.
Paragraph 3. Mr. PHILLIPS drew attention to the paper submitted by the
Australian Delegation in the London Conference (E/PC/T/C.II/29,
30 October 1946), asking that this Paragraph should 'be drawn broadly enough
to allow continuation of Australians special arrangements with
neighbouring islands. He did not wish to enter a specific reservation on
this point, but wished it noted in the records of the feeting that
reference had been made to the London document.
Paragraph 4. The CHAIRMAN drew the attention of the Committee to the
reservations made in the London Conference by the Delegations for Lebanon
and. BraziI (London Report, page 11, paragraph 5: (c)). Both Delegations
wished to maintain their reservations, pending further instructions from
their governments.
Mr. ALVAREZ wished. to join the Delegations for Lebanon and Brazil
in this reservation. The CHAIRMAN pointed out that new reservations night
preferably be brought up at the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee.
Mr LEDDY explained that Paragraph 2 of Article 66 does not call
for a two-thirds majority vote in individual cases. The qualified
majority was required when general criteria were set up by the Organization.
Paragraph 5 was adopted. -
The Committee discussed
Administrative Matters. The CHAIRMAN explained that the Sub-Committee
on Multilateral Trade Agreement Negotiations should hold a short formal
meeting next week, on Wednesday.
/Mr. LACARTE (Executive Secretary) E/PC/T/C .6/34
Page 6
Mr. LACARTE (Executive Secretary) reminded the Committee that. out of
eighty-nine. Articles of the Charter, thirty-nine were discussed generally,
of which same twenty-five were tentatively approved and passed to the Legal
Drafting Sub-Committee and the rest was being discussed: by the Sub-.Committees
without being tentatively approved.' He expressed: the apprehension of the
Secretariat that at the present speed the work of the Committee might not
be finished before 28 February. |
GATT Library | vc588cy5736 | Summary Record of the Eleventh Meeting : Held at the Capitol , Hevana, Cuba, on Saturday, 20 December 1947, at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 23, 1947 | Second Committee: Economic Development | 23/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.11 and E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.1-17 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/vc588cy5736 | vc588cy5736_90180449.xml | GATT_155 | 2,724 | 18,158 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.2/SR. 11
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 23 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SECOND COMMITTE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE ELEVENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol , Hevana, Cuba,
on Saturday, 20 December 1947, at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. ABELLO (Philippines)
COMPOSITION OF THE JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES II AND III
The Committee approved the proposal of the Chairman and of the CHAIRMAN
of the THIRD COMMITTEE that the Sub-Committee should be composed of
representatives of the following countries: Argentina, Belgium, Brazil,
Canada, Chile, El Salvador, France, Haiti, Iran, Poland, Sweden, Syria,
Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Venezuela.
ARTICLE 12
Mr. ADARKAR (India) opened a general discussion of the Article and stated
that since Article 12 had been proposed at Geneva for the first time, the
Indian and other delegations opposed it, on the ground that the subject was
too complicated to deal with without adequate preparation; nevertheless,
as it was generally accepted, the delegation of India had recommended its
adoption to its Government. The amendment proposed by the United States had,
however, caused India to revert to her previous view, as she was not in favour
of keeping the rule and deleting the exceptions. The obligations of lending
and borrowing countries were set forth in general terms in Article 11, but
the last sentence of Article 12, paragraph 1, imposed a further explicit
obligation on the borrowing country which would upset the balance of the Charter.
No country with any regard for international goodwill would take any
unilateral action affecting existing investments without settling with the
countries concerned. He asked what would be the character of the negotiations
envisaged in paragraph 2. If it was written into the Charter that each
Member should negotiate upon request, it would deprive that Member of the
right of taking unilateral action. The United States amendment was a
retrograde step in that it removed those exceptions which permitted
unilateral action in certain cases. Moreover, if negotiations failed, would
the machinery of the Organization impose pressure upon a country which was
considered responsible for such failure, as in the case of tariff negotiations
under Article 17? The cases were not parallel, as tariff negotiations
/assumed reciprocity, E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.11
Page 2
assumed reciprocity, whereas a country, for example, might initiate
negotiations about existing investments without being able to offer further
loans in the future.
Further, the word "investment" was ambiguous; it might mean fully-owned
direct investment or it might refer to a minority holding of shares in
a company. The United States amendment suggested that in a case where shares
were partly owned by nationals and partly by foreigners, any necessary or
desired action would have to be carried out through negotiations by the
Governments concerned. He believed the amendment of this paragraph as
proposed by the United States would either result in interference in the
domestic affairs of a country or give rise to practical difficulties. He
proposed the out-right deletion of Article 12.
Mr. NASH (New Zealand) said that at Geneva his country had opposed the
proposed text, but they would now approve any text that would facilitate
investment so long as there were no suggestion of compulsion. Without
investment there could be no economic development. Regulation of investment
would, however, be helpful. Neither New Zealand nor any of the new countries
would have reached their present stage of development without investment from
the older countries. The principle of national treatment was a correct one.
He opposed the United States amendment because of the compulsion to
negotiate which paragraph 2 suggested. The phrase: "international
Investments acceptable to them" should be amended. Investment as such was
not to be derogated but no private organization should have an unqualfied
right to go to a country and utilize its resources; the borrowing country
should have the option of rejecting an offer. All countries would buffer
without foreign investment, but it should be controlled. Nothing in the
Article should be so construed as to oblige a member to have any international
investment made In his country without prior approval of that country.
Mr. NOVOA (Mexico) stated that the lesser developed countries were so
not because they had too many resources to develop but because they had no
resources, and must obtain them from other countries either through
international credits or loans, or by foreign investment. He opposed the
representative of India, believing there should be in the Charter a mention
made of the rules governing investments but agreed with the representative of
New Zealand that there should be no element of compulsion for one country
to receive the investment of another. If, however, a country attracted.
foreign investment, and accepted it, security and non-discriminatory treatment
should be guaranteed to the investor. It must also be recognized that any
rules laid down must not conflict with or require the alteration of
domestic legislation. The Mexican amendment was designed to achieve these ends,
/He reserved the E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.11
Page 3
He reserved the right to make further comments when the Article was discussed
paragraph by paragraph.
Mr. HAIDER (Iraq) agreed with the representative of India that the
question was very complicated; there were already adequate provisions in
Article 11 and Article 69, paragraph c (i). Article 12 should therefore be
deleted completely, but the Conference should pass a resolution to form a
study group to consider thoroughly the problem of investment and prepare
recommendations or agreements laying down in detail the principles which should
cover investments, and embodying the provisions already existing in
Articles 11 and 69.
Mr. SKAUG (Norway) recalled that at Geneva his delegation had thought
paragraph 1 might be interpreted. as giving more extensive rights to foreign
investors than was just, and. that paragraph 2 was obscure. He proposed no
amendment to paragraph 2, because the United States amendment covered the
point. Norway was a heavy Importer of foreign capital, and this had
contributed, to her economic development in modern times. She had carried on
negotiations with foreign investors and would continue to do so, and therefore
did not agree with the representative of India that the obligation to
negotiate would be of any danger.
Norway withdrew its reservation (page 24, document E/CONF.2/C.2/9) in
support of the United States amendment, and supported. the New Zealand.
amendment to paragraph 1, withdrawing the Norwegian amendment to that
paragraph.
Mr. HASNIE (Pakistan) believed that the New Zealand amendment was not
contrary to the attitude of his country. Pakistan wished to attract investment
but looked to the suppliers of capital for a sympathetic understanding.
There was little objection to Article 12 so long as it was contained within
reasonable bounded.
The principle that compensation should be fixed in advance, referred to
in the Belgian Note under Article 12, paragraph 2 would. not always be
practicable; any attempt to elucidate Article 12 by such a note would lead to
difficulties.
Mr. RUBIN (United States) said that the United States considered that
international private investment was of the greatest importance in connection
with the economic development of those countries as yet undeveloped, and would
help in solving balance of payment difficulties. The balance of the Charter
referred to by the delegate of India was unimportant so long as the objectives
of the Charter were achieved. There was no intention to restrict national
sovereign rights; the United States was entirely in agreement with the
principle expressed by New Zealand, , although there might be some difficulty
with the exact wording of the text, particularly in respect to the fact that
each country would have an obgliation to undertake the screening of investments.
/The United States E/CONF.2/C .2/SR.11
Page 4
The United States believed it desirable to insert, as in Article 12,
paragraph 1, of the Charter, provisions for such investments, which would
recognize that countries had their sovereign rights with regard to capital
invested in them, and would also ensure safety for those investments.
Mr. McLIAN (Ireland) expressed a practical and empirical rather than
a theoretical view. The Irish Government Would not be able to accept any
interpretation or amendment of Article 12 Which would require the modification
of its existing legislation. Ireland was in need of foreign capital, but
wanted the majority ownership of her industry to remain in the country. She
had in 1932 legislated the Manufactures' Act, according to the terms of which
51 per cent of the capital and 66 2/3 per cent of the voting rights of all
manufacturing, concerns must be in the hands of nationals; the concerns must
also have a majority of Irish directors. Licenses, however, were granted
to non-nationals to set up and own industries of an approved type, particularly
in fields not covered by existing industry owned. by the Irish. There was
no question of expropriation of foreign capital or discriminatory treatment.
The Act applied. to manufacturing concerns only IIrish domestic legislation
was in support of the letter of the Draft Charter, and clashed in no way with
Aticle 12.
Mr. BRIGNOLI (Argentina) said that all nations were interested in the
recognition of measures to facilitate producivte investment. Argnetina had
granted many facilities to foreign investments; the Argentine decree of
20 Arpill 1943 was designed to prevent only the inflow of temporary and
speculative capital during the war In July of the current year his country
had taken further measures to stimulate investments profitable to the
investors as well as to itself. He therefore favoured facilities for foreign
investments but countries should retain the right of free determination with
regard to those investments. Foreign investments should be subject to risks
of all commercial enterprises. The principle of non-intervention of
Article 12, pargaraph 1, was not sufficiently taken into account in the
succeeding paragraphs. With regard to paragraph 2 (iv) he noted that
Argentina's Constitution and. laws provided guarantees for public and private
investments and for full compensation in case of transfer of ownership.
The Charter, however, should only establish equality as between foreign
investments, but not as between froeign and domestic investments.
Mr. LIMA (El Salvador) recognized that investments were indispensable
for ecoomnic development; consequently it was important to establish, in
the Charter the necessary regulations determining the specific difference
between public andar, private investments. Favourable conditionw :ere necessary
/to promote investments E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.11 Page 5
to promote investments in addition to Charter principles.
Quoting standards from the report on conditions for foreign investments
by the Special General Committee of the League of Nations, he thought that it
would be unnecessary to appoint an investment study group.
Article 12 should be examined in conjunction with all amedments
presented to it and a new, text should, be worked out in conformity with the
principles enunciated, by the different countries.
Mr. TORRES (Brazil) noted that foreign investments were welcome in his
country and had played an appreciable part in its economic development.
Recent legislation had. encouraged foreign investments. Co-operation among
nations to promote private, public and international investments and
subsequent social progress was most desirable. His country had suggested
at the London Conference recognition in the Charter that capital played an
important part in economic development. He consequently supported the
retention of Article 12 with the understanding that countries would take
their own legislative measures with regard to their internal conditions.
Paragraph 1 of that Article was entirely acceptable. The establishment of
rules for treatment of foreign investments, as attempted, in paragraph 2, was
advisable but seemed impracticable so far. He suggested that the United States
amendment to paragraph 2 (document E/CONF.2/C.2/9, page 17) might be improved
by the substitution of the word. "may" for "shall". He supported the principle
of paragraph 3 of Article 12 as recognizing a desirable trend and attempting
to reinforce it.
Mr. LIEU (China) agreed with preceding speakers regarding the importance
of foreign investment for economic development. In view of the importance
of the principle of non-interference in the internal policies of members
recognized in paragraph 1, he could not support the suggestion to delete
the entire Article 12.
A provision was necessary to prevent special privileges for foreign
investments in countries importing capital. Contrary to some representatives,
he felt that the principle of non-intervention in paragraph 1 was necessary,
in addition to the New Zealand amendment, to prevent foreign investments
from turning later into political instruments. He agreed that Governments
should. be able to exclude foreign investments from certain branches of
industry. He supported most parts of Article 12, stressing the importance
of provision for equal treatment of foreign and, national investments.
Mr. FARINA (Uruguay) also noted, that foreign investments had played a
considerable part in the economic development of his country, although
sometimes they had retarded it. He had proposed an amendment of substance
to Article 12, limiting it to the declaration of principles in paragraph 1.
/The laws of his (.2;, .11
Page 6
The laws of his country afforded equal treatment to dforeign an domestic
investments and guaranteed full oproperty t foreign investors. The amount
of compensation, in case of transfer of property, was determined by the
highest tribunals.
Mr. BLAZEJ (Czechoslovakia) considered that the provisions of Article 12
were impoartacont to all countries. The question was what price should be paid
by countries for foreign investments In that connection he supported the
New Zealand. amendment to paragraph 1. In case of nationalization investors
had to receive just compensation, but on the same conditions as domestic
investors; he supported the principle affefcting confiscation of property
contained in the note to paragraph 2 on page 13 of the Charter. The matter
of compensation for investments raised the question of capital movement.
He supported the Danish amendment; many countries were parties to the
Agreement of the International Monetary Fund which provided that in case of
balance of payments difficulties preference could be given in the use of
foreign exchange to current transactions. While Article 12 needed
improvement, it should not be deleted.
Mr. SHAMMA (Lebanon) supported the views of the representative of Iraq.
Lebanon dependieed greatly on foreign investments for economic development.
In view of the adequate provisions in Articles 11 and 69 of the Charter he
supported the deletion of Article 12.
Mr. COREA (Ceylon) supported the proposal made by the representative of
Uruguay to make Article 12 a "declaration of faith" since the provisions
contained in the various paragraphs were generally accepted. The last
sentence of paragraph 1 laid down too extensive an obligation, As regards
paragraph .2 (b) he thought that the principle might be recognized, although
the paragraph could be deleted. He could not support the new United States
amendment to paragraph 2 because countries should not be compelled to carry
on negotiations with regard to investments. Paragraph 3 was superfluous in
any case. His delegation had submitted an amendment to paragraph 1 similar
in substance to the New Zealand amendment but wider in scope.
Mr. CLERMONT-TONNERRE MOVNE-TONIRE (France) thought an Article in the Charter should
be devoted to the important question of international investments. Only
the principles should be established; the rest of the problem was too complex
for definition in the Charter. There was general agreement with regard to
(1) the importance of international investments for economic development,
(2) the undesirability of forcing countries to accept foreign investments
without their assent and control ove)r them and (3 the desirability of ensuring
sufficient guarantees. He supported Article 12 as embodying those principles
and establishing an equilibrium between the interests of investor and debtor
/countries which would E/CONF.2/C .2/SR.11
Page 7
countries which would be upset by too many amendments. If it was impossible
to retain Article 12 in its present form, then he would support the
United States proposal to delete paragraph 2. He reserved. further remarks
on that amendment Paragraph 1 contained precise principles and should be
maintained.
Mr. de la CAMARA (Cuba) shared the general view with regard to the
importance of foreign investments. Past abuses of investors and debtors
should be avoided in the future. To promote investments just provision should
be made for equality of treatment and free acceptance of investments. He
supported paragraph 1 and the United States amendment concerning freedom of
acceptance.
The CHAIRMAN announced. that his list of speakers contained the following
countries: Guatemala, Venezuela, Costa Rica, Chile, Peru, Australia, Poland,
Syria and Burma. The Committee would meet again on the following Monlay
at 10.30 a.m.
The meeting rose at 7.10 p.M. |
GATT Library | kf530cw5789 | Summary Record Of The Eleventh Meeting (III a) : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Monday, 15 December 1947, at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 16, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 16/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.11 and E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/kf530cw5789 | kf530cw5789_90190226.xml | GATT_155 | 2,719 | 17,905 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C. 3/SR.11
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 16 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLO1
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUMMARY REC0RD OF THE ELEVENTH MEETING (III a)
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Monday, 15 December 1947, at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: M. L. D. WILGRESS (Canada)
I. DISCUSSION ON ARTICLE 18 (First Reading)
1. Item 75 of Revised Annotated Agenda (document E/CONF.2/C.3/6)
Mr. GUERRA (Cuba) pointed out that item 75 should include a further
amendment, namely, the deletion of the word "transportation" in the first
sentence of pragraph 2 of Article 18, as well as the total elimination of.
the second sentence of that paragraph.
The whole structure of the present system in Cuba, both for raiwlasy as
well as highway and maritime traffic, was based on the differential treatment
now prohibited in the draft Charter.
The second amendment was intended to sanction the maintenance .of
exceptions in certain cases in order to protect domestic industries by means
of internal taxes, such as was provided for under Articles 25 and 26 in
regard to subsidies.
Mr.LEDDY Lky (United States f Awmerica) thought there had been confusion
in the interpretation of the Article, the second sentence of which, far from
being a departure from the principle of national treatment, was intended to
strengthen that principle and prevent its abIllLuselustrating the case of
tung oil and linseed oil, which could be considered as competitive and
substitutable, he stated that the .United States, under the first sentence of
paragraph 1 of thec Artile, would be required to apply the sametaxation
policy to a domestic product as to a like imported product. The first
sentence was, however, qualified. by the second. because if no substantial
domestic production existed, a tax could not be placed. on tung oil in order
to protect linseedw oil hich was not similarly taxed.
In r egard to the United States amendment (item 74), the proposed.
additional paragraph was intended to cover cases where intesernal exci duties
were, for, administrative reasons,collected at tha tine of importation,. as
well a"s mixing regulations also enforced at that stage, ;
Z/Mr..GOM (Brazil) E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.11
Page 2
Mr. GOMEZ (Brazil) thought it was unreasonable to refuse countries the
specific right of "mixing" and utilizing certain imported products in
equal proportion, which was a necessity for the economic security of certain
countries. The escape clauses in the Charter were restricted to the
interpretation placed on them by the Organization, The principle underlying
Article 18 should be brought into stricter conformity with Articles 9, 11,
13, 14 and 60.
Mr. LAMSVELT (Netherlands) wished to be sure that nothing in the text
of paragraph 2 (Article 18) could be construed as allowing the re-establishment
of differential transport charges tending to further national interests to
the detriment of other countries, The pre-war "Seehafen-Ausnamtarife" of
Germnan had greatly hampered the trade of Belgium and the Netherlands by
diverting traffic to Bremen and Hamburg, instead of following the more
natural routes over Belgium and Holland.
He requested, on behalf also of the Belgian delegation, to have once
more placed on record the following footnote which had appeared in
document E/PC/T/174 of 15 August 1947:
"Since the present paragraph 2 relates solely to the question of
differential treatment between imported and domestic goods, the inclusion
of the last sentence in that paragraph should not be understood to give
sanction to, the use of artificial measures in the form of differential
transport charges designed to divert traffic from one port to another"
With this footnote on record, no country ocul d defend special discriminatory
transport charges based on the words "economic operation of the means of
transport."
With the suggestion of Cuba for the deletion of the word "transportation"
the Netherlands delegation could not agree.
In reply to a question by Mr. CHAVEZ (Peru), the CIRHAMAN stated that
under Article 18 conflict would arise in regard to the exemption ofrm taxes
on material imported for a given industry.
Mr. DDYLE (United States of America), replying to a questiobn y
Mr. DBBJREAA (Syria), stated that there was nothing in Article 18 to prevent
taxes being imposed on privately owned motor-cars, but not on those used
for public transportation.
.Mr STKIUC (Switzerland) felt that a clearer and more precise text
should be drafted. Outlining the "Wahlen Plan" which had been put into
force in Switzerland during the war and had greatly increas ed product,io;
he asked whether such a system would be compatible with Article 18h. Te
"Caisse de Compensation" was a war-time measure, which obliged the importer
of cert aincommodities to contribute to a fund for Swiss producers with a
view to maintaining domestic production of like comnodities. He thought
/tat such E/CONF. 2/C.3/SR.11
Page 3
that such a system was preferable to high customs tariffs because it took
both producers and workers into account.
At the request of Mr.LEDDY (United States of America),. the representative
of Switzerland agreed to prepare a report on the system in force in
Switzerland for circulation to the Comittee.
In answer to a request for clarification by M. COREA (Ceylon) as to
whether it was permissible for the United States to impose a tax on imported
natural rubber in order to assist the production of synthetic rubber,
Mr.LEDDY (United States of America) replied in the negative.
Mr. D'ASCOLI (Venezuela) thought that confusion would arise by stating
that an internal tax would not be considered as such when collected at the
customs. He suggested the following alternative text, which he felt would
safeguard national production:
"Taxes and charges referred to in this Article which according to
the administrative system of a Member country are collected together
with custom duties, will be subject to all the requirements of this
Article. nAy Member which employs internal taxes and theo ther charges
referred to in this Article as a part of its system of industrial
protection, may no withstanding raise its custom duties at the time of
diminishing or eliminating the said taxes in a proportion equivalent to
such reduction or elimination."
Mr. LEDYD (United States of America) stated that the provisions relating
to internal taxes were not designed to limit the degree of protection, but
merely to determine the form which that protection should take. Any country
was free to replace internal taxes by import tariffs which were subject to
the negotiations referred to in Article 17. There was no general binding or
limitations on tariffs as such.
r.LLURAS (Colombia) stressed that existing taxes should continue until
after elimination through negotiation; the aim of the Colombian amendment
was to provide for a transition period for such elimination.
The CHAIRMAN, in reply to a question by Mr. ADARKAR (India), Stated
that Article 13 dealt not only with quantitative restrictions but also with
other protective measures for the purpose of economic development, which
came within the scope of Committee II.
Mr. NASH (New Zealand.) explained that negotiations for the reduction
of tariffs had been envisaged in the Charter in order to bring about freer
trade. Discusseicas in Geneva had endeavoured to taeke all practices into
account. The purpose of the Charter could not be defeated by allowing an
internal charge en an imported, product,whilst a like duty was not levied
on the national product. It vas appropriate for Committee III or ary
/sub-conmittee Page 4 E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.11
sub-committee to extend the provisions of the Article so as to provide for
any legitimate practices brought up in the discussion.
Mr. SAHLIN (Sweden) explained the Swedish amendment Suggesting
substitution of the word "system" for "measures" in paragraph 4 (b).
Referring to the variations which existed in Sweden in respect of the
proportion of imports of certain foodstuffs in relation to the domestic
production, it seemed clear that the provisions of paragraph 4 (b) should be
interpreted as referring to the system as a whole and not to the percentage
applied at a given date.
Mr. HOLLOWAY (Union of South Africa), referring to the Cuban amendments,
stated that if the word "transportation" were deleted, the last sentence
would have no meaning. On the other hand, if "transportation" were retained
without the last sentence, ITO would be empowered to interfere in the
internal administration of railways in the different countries. The
intention was that countries should not be permitted to annul, by means of
railway rates, the concessions granted under customs tariffs. Furthermore,
his country felt that if both amendments were approved, there would be a gap
inasmich as a country could, by means of differential railway rates, take
away concessions granted under, the Charter.
He asked whether the Cuban delegation considered. the amendments as one
whole, or whether the first suggestion could be rejected, and the second
accepted without detriment to the Article.
Mr. GUERRA(Cuba) replied that the two proposals should be considered.
as one .
Mr. PELLIZA(Argentina) explained that his amendment (item 65) added.
to paragraph 4(a) products more essential than were cinematographic film
provided a more reasonable effective date, and extended the application of
paragraph 4 also to paragraphs 1 and 2. Internal taxes used for economic
and social purposes should not be eliminated. The amendment to paragraph 5
(item 73) merely served to avoid taking money from one pocket and putting
it in another.
Mr. PUIG (Ecuador) asked for a more specific answer as to whether
exemption, from taxes granted to certain new industries would be forbidden
under Article 18.
The CHAIRMAN replied that if it meant that a state enterprise was
exempted from taxes on imported materials, the answer was no.
Mr. PUIG (Ecuador) then asked, whether paragraph 2 would forbid
preferential tariffs granted temporarily to domestic products in the case of
congestion due to lack of rolling stock of state operated railroads.
/The CHAIRMAN E /CONF.2/C. 3/SR.11
Page 5
The CHAIRMAN replied that paragraph 2 did preclude differential transport
rates in favour of a domestic product: it would be necessary, to decide each
case on its merits.
Mr., PUIG (Ecuador) agreed, but stated that such system 8ratem had been used
in his country in preference to suspending imports. The sub-committee
should study this problem as well as the necessity of "mixing' regulations in
the case of sdromstic upluses,
DERr. L (Naorwqy) culd. notsupport amendments contrary to the
principle of Article 18, and. was in favour of those submitted by the
delegatsion of the United States and Sweden; favourable consideroatin should
be given to the statement of the representative of Switzerland. Internal
taxes were sometimes the most adequate way to stabilize prices: the
procedure as practiced in Norway, where taxation was used to lower the price
sometimes of imported, sometimes of domestic products, was designed to
equalize, not to discriminate. TEhe orwegian amendment (item 70) would allow
fior nternal regulations used for other than protective purposes, e.g. in
more or less state-controlled industries. Detailed explanation would be
submitted to the submM-cmittee.
SA E (Mexico) agreed. i principle with the statement of the -
representative of New Zealand, but paragraphs 1 and 2 could be accepted
nlyl if the situation mentioned by the representatives of E}uador and Peru,
concerning protection of industry by tax exemption, was not precluded.
Internal regulations on mixing were important to industrial development
to ensure a market for a national product. Paragraph 3 should be modified.
and co-ordinated with the provisions for Economic Development. Committee II
should be represented in the sub-committee when that item was studied.
Mr Saenz supported the Argentine amendment to paragraph 4.
Mr. GONZALEZ (Uruguay) noted that Annex A to Article 16 provided that
in a preferential stem preferential treatment through internal taxation
may be replaced by a preference in customs duties and then be negotiable.
The amendment of Colombia and Uruguay (item 54)would provide that existing
internal taxation would be negotiable as set forth in Article 17
Replying to a question by Mr. LLERAS (Colombia) concerning taxation
of a state controlled monopoly, the CHAIRMAN stated the particular case
would come under Article 30.
r. LLORENIE (Philippines) stated he would suit a -emorandum.
concerning Article 18; the amendment submitted by Peru was of great interest
to his delegation.
Mr. STUCKI (Switzerland) noted the difficulties in providing for all the
detailed circumstances of internal taxation and wondered whether it would
/not be more E/CONF. 2/C. 3/SR.11
Page 6
not be more practical to limit the provision to the general principle and to
leave internal taxes to be negotiated together with customs tariffs.
Mr. CEAVEZ (Peru) stated that a revised text of his amendment in
accordance with the discussions of Article 18 would be submitted to the
sub-committee.
Mr. SUETENS (Belgium) supported the remarks of the representative of
Switzerland. Commercial treaties usually contained clauses dealing with
internal taxation; and the ITO would give consideration to special situations
within the principles of the Charter.
The CHAIRMAN noted there was general agreement regarding the principle
of Article 18, but differences as to degree and scope of its application.
On the suggestion of Mr. LEDDY (United States of America) it was agreed to
refer amendments to Articles 18 and 19 to the sub-committee on Articles 16
and 17 and to defer decision on possible changes in its composition, until
the discussion of Articles 18 and 19 was concluded.
II. PROPOSED NEW ARTICLE 18A
Mr. COLOCOTRONIS (Greece) and Mr. LECUYER (France) supported the
proposal by the delegation of Norway (item 76) for a new article concerning
services.
Mr. MELANDER (Norway) stated that the purpose of this proposal was to
prevent state discrimination in the field of shipping, finance, and insurance.
It supplemented Article 18 and the principle underlying it was already contained
in Article 50 which also dealt with services. Complaints arising from the
propased Article would be referred to the ITO or the Specialized Agencies if
such were established. To counter possible objections against the proposal,
based on the special problems of economic development, these problems could
be taken care of in Article 15.
Mr.SENEND) suported. tahe Norwegin roposal.-
MRr.Indi AA1 (aDAR oRg the proposal went beyond the oife scop 0
Chapter IV which dealt with goods, not services, and was incownsistent ith
tQ ps eArs-ofe , e 1 8. It womuld ak e it-imposmiblefor countries to
develop pinShipg, insurance or financial services. Protection by subsidies
and tariffs wasrecognized by the Cha rte,but here tariffs were impracticable;
ifo a cyuwntr as not in a position to compete by means of subsidies, it could
not develhoppingp si unles s it was free to reserve part of its trade to
its merchant .navy clesArti 13 and id 50 d not provid e anadequate ana.logy
MHr.K E SAniCL( UtedKingdom) felt that the subjects of hippwing as
fcf iently relsued to warrant its inclusion in the Charter, although the
neragrlp robl emshou blde dealt with by the proper agency when it was
established. If there was merit to Article 50, safeguard against
iscrimmna itL E/CONF. 2/C. 3/SR.11
Page 7
discrimination in shipping was equally justified. If it were included in
Chapter IV, ) then, speo fac,od the pvosibions of Article 13 would apply,
. SAHLIN (Sweden) and Mfr LAMSVELTVWNetherlands) supported the
Norwegian proposal.
Mr. D'SCOLI (Venezuela) wondered whether acceptance of the proposal
would relieve countries of the discriminatory practices of private
enterprise. If so, it could be accepted, but he doubted that It would solve
his country's situation.
Mr. PELLIZA (Argentina) agreed with the statement of the representative
of India, and thought the problem should be dealt with by the International
Maritime Conference to be held in February. The term "discrm nation"..
should not be confused with "assisted develpmeont." Shipping clauses in
Argentne i cmmerrcial treaties did not discriminate against those who
offered better services.
Mr.ORMTON (Australia)ag reed that the Chapter dealt wiht goosda nd not
with Services and s uggested the International Mabritime Conference should
consider the problem.
Mr. NASH (New Zealand) while supporting the principle of
non-discrimination, thought the Norwegian amendment would need re-drafingt,
There weremany difficulties to overcome: it was usually not the goverenm,t
but individuals who decided on who should undertake the financing, shipping
and insurance, Often currency difficulties influenced this choice, as well
as long established practice.
It was agreed to establish an ad-hoc sub-committee to study the Norwegian:
Proposal, composed of; Argentina, France, Greece, India, Norway, Union of:
South Africa,Unuited Kingdom, and Venezuela. This wouldme et on
17 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
The meeting r ose at 7.30 p.m. |
GATT Library | pm440gs1295 | Summary Record of the Eleventh Plenary Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Wednesday, 3 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 3, 1947 | 03/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/SR.11 and E/CONF.2/SR.1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/pm440gs1295 | pm440gs1295_90180138.xml | GATT_155 | 139 | 1,073 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE
ON DU E/CONF. 2/SR.11
3 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE ELEVENTH PLENARY MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba,
on Wednesday, 3 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
President: Mr. Sergio I. CLARK (Cuba)
1, PROPOSAL BY THE PRESIDENT FOR THE NOMINATION AS VICE-PRESIDENT OF
MR. WALTER STOCKI (SWITZERLAND)
There being no further nominations, the PRESIDENT declared
Mr. Walter Stucki (Switzerland) elected unanimously as Vice-President.
2. AMENDMENT TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE RECOMMENDED BY THE GENERAL
COMMITTEE (E/CONF.2/BUR.3).
Mr. SUETENS (Belgium) stated that the General Committee had re-examined
rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure and had discussed it with the delegate from
Chile. The text contained in E/CONF.2/BUR.3 had been unanimously accepted.
The report was approved.
The meeting rose at 10.40 a.m. |
|
GATT Library | js421hj1424 | Summary Record of the Fifteenth Meeting : Held at Lake Success on 6 February 1947 at 10:30 a.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 6, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 06/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/45 and E/PC/T/C.6/37-55 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/js421hj1424 | js421hj1424_90230094.xml | GATT_155 | 2,292 | 14,821 | United Nations Nations Unies
ECONOMIC CONSEIL
AND ECONOMIQUE 6 February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL : GS
COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE OF Tr
=ITIONS CONFERENCE OFNCRADE AND EMP DMENTOYUlT
RYMME R RTCOTHE FIFTEENTH MEETING G MM=
Held kKEat e Success Fon 6 ryru947 1S4 at0 10m.:3 a.
ChairHman: . E. M. ErLik COBAN
1. Conservation ofm docuentC/Ts E/P/C. /3d E/PC 'jt/6/W../w _45
The Committee considered document E/P./T/C06/38,aconnginiwn the
texts of Articlea 42 end 43, as tentatively d reeal at the 12t and. 13th
meetings of the Committee. Reggrdin_ the notes on Article 40, on pages
5 and 6 of this documene,Dthf Ielegate for France requested that on
page 5, article 40,graraCzaph 1, folith Jbne, the "ord. support" be changed
to "acquiescence" because the latter reflected more corr ctly' rthe Fench
word "assista nce".
Theg Deleate for tihe UKingdomzgdCM requested the following chance
on page 6, third line from ope dCp: "own behalfn r or, behalf of any
affected. person,..." corresponding to Article 40, (United Kingdom
suggesting) as recorded in the minutes of the 12th Meeting.
ommi Ccmittee approved in second reading the texts of Articles 42
and 43, as reproduced in document E/PC/T/C.6/38 with the corrections
requested by theg Deleates for Fraance nd, the Unitegdo Kindm.
The Australi-an rearranngemet of Article 40 as contained in document
TE/PC/W,C.6 45 'was referred toLhe teDraftingfdng Sob-Ccmmittee and the
Delegates for France and. Canada reserved their position in respect of 'this
rrangement entdpnn~consideration ofo o documE/Pe/T/nt /CC.6W.45 by the
LvaDrafting Sub-Committee
The ommittee passed, then to the discussion of Chapter V11 of the
proposed ITO Charter.
/2. Conideration g of E/PC/T/C. 6/45
Page 2
2. Consideration of Article 46
The CHAIRMAN stated that the Secretariat had issued a draft of
Article 46 and asked the Executive Secretary to present it. The Executive
Secretary, Mr. LACARTE, explained that the aim of the Secretariat was to
focus attention on substance and to do away with the redundancies in the
London text. The new draft contained only changes in form and presentation,
not altering the substance to any great degree.
The Delegate from the Netherlands stated that the text as it stood
was the result of exhaustive discussions in London and that he was in favour
of maintaining it in its present form.
The Delegate from Cuba agreed with the Delegate from the Netherlands,
and stated that the world"relationship " had a specific technical meaning
in the context. He agreed nevertheless, that certain unnecessary words
should be taken out.
The Delegates from Canada and Australia supported the Delegates from
the Netherlands and from Cuba
The Delegate for Belgium stated that it had been agreed by the Legal
Drafting Sub-Committee to keep the words "Members recognize that" in other
chapters of the Charter. He, therefore, suggested that these words remain
in Article 46.
The Delegation from the United Kingdom also preferred the London text
and pointed out that in one place the Secretariat draft reversed cause
and effect.
The CHAIRMAN stated that the test of Article 46 should remain the
same in substance, but as to drafting points the suggestion of the
United States Delegate and the Secretariat would be incorporated.
3. Consideration of Article 47
-The CHAIRMAN stated that three suggestions had been made concerning
this Article: by the United States, by Cuba and by the Secretariat.
/(a) United States E/PC/T/C .6/45
Page 3
(a) United States proposal on delegation of paragraphs 5 and 6
(E/PC/T/C.6/W.46)
As to paragraph 5, the United States Delegate stated that as all
conservation arrangements involve regulation, the principles pertaining
to regulatory agreements should apply, and, in his opinion, they were not
formulated in Chapter VII to include conservation arrangements.
The Delegate from the Netherlands stated that paragraphs 5 and 6
should be considered together; a shortage in a particular commodity
often leads to a surplus in the future, because of over-investment, and
the United States agreed that regulatory agreements might be concluded
for commodities in short supply, when it consented to include in Article 52,
paragraph 1, .the words: "is expected to develop". Furthermore, the
Preparatory Commission of FAO endorsed the objectives laid down in
Article 47 and in view of their importance and precisely on the suggestion
of the United States Delegate, incorporated the texts of Articles 46 and 47
in its Report. It is one of the functions of FAO to make recommendations
in the field of agricultural policy, including questions relating to the
conservation of resources. Should paragraphs 5 and 6 be deleted, the FAO
would have to revise its Charter.
The FAO Observer supported the views expressed by the Delegate from
the Netherlands and stated that the Preparatory Commission of FAO had
endorsed all six objectives of Article 47. The FAO report emphasizes the
fact that the present danger, is the holding back of the necessary expansion
of consumption because of the fear of a future surplus. The present tendency
is to play for safety and not expand production fast enough. The FAO report
clearly .recognizes that arrangements for calling regulatory action
(establishment of price floors and ceilings stocks) could be made for
commodities which are presently in short supply. It is for this reason
that FAO has recommended the creation of a Study, Group to deal with grain,
a commodity which there is presently shortage.
/The Delegate F/PC/T/C.6/45
Page 4
The Delegate from the Netherlands stated that a Rice Study
Group and a Conference are being planned with the intention of
expending the consumption and trade in this commodity. It is
only arrangements dealing solely with allocation problems which
are excluded from the scope of Chapter VII.
The Delegate for Canada pointed out that to exclude
paragraph 5 or 6 might limit the scope of possible agreements and
therefore, these paragraphs should remain.
The Delegates for Australia, Belgium and Czechoslovakia agreed
with the Canadian viewpoint.
The Delegate for India stated that the two clauses were
discordant with the rest of the Article, but are essential, and should
therefore be kept.
The Delegates for Cuba and the United Kingdom agreed with the
United States in the deletion of paragraphs 5 and 6.
The CHAIRMAN concluded, that the two paragraphs should be
maintained, even though the wording of paragraph 6 be clarified.
(b) Discussion of the Secretariat paper (E/PC/T/C.6/W.51)
The Executive Secretary stated that his idea was to include
Paragraph 1 in the preamble, and that in order to clarify the text,
~~~~~~.1 * . * .*.,'- ' 1'^' -.' :
paragraphs 5 and 6 could become each a sub-paragraph. of a second paragraph
ann Article 47 introduced by the words: 'ComsdOiti arangements may
also be emplo ed. to". He also proposed the deletion of the second. part
of paragraph 4..
T>e Delegate of the United Kingdom was of the opinion that the
wors "long-te m equilibrium" in paragraph 4 should not be deleted..
The Delegates from the Netherlands and the United. States
agreed with the United Kingdom Delegate.
Tmie Execat ve Secretary suggested; that the text then ight re-d-
asCfollowa "to stabilize the price of a primary commodity at or
about the level ,,,
Is>. r -l- E/PC/T/C .6/45
Page5
The Delegate for the United States stated that the aim was
not to stabilize; but
The Delegate for Cuba to the merging of paragraph 1
- Cua.ar . I-
graphs 5 pr amNe am o-. # aettin ;.ayttof pamgrap1.s5 ,and. 6 front ,
the rest ot-the Artic~e. . _ ., . - -
(c) Cuban draft ofrapaoh .; -: . ..
The Delegate-or.uba, stated that the purpose of the Oubanidra±.t
as to ake iexliqit -the, idea contained .implicity in.Taragaph .
4 and recopfi FAO as one of the purposes. of a cowodity agreemnt,-
.naely, -rioe. stablil1zatio - . - '.
~-~e.-.oi. <n4on.of. the Unzted Z.Kngadpj De.e-ates. -the Quba~z ',pr gatio1
under-emphasized the consumerst approach. *. - :
Tq _Qna dirs Delegate proposed to add. to~ the Cuibsn draft/:the.foloving
wod:r- <s~llhput unfatrnees to. consumers".- .Tv-the questionn of the 2-''-
- i-iai. as .,to Vwethex, thi. was. 'aceeptable to the Comittee r the-.
United States Meligate answered that .it as not. The whold
ChapAer, IrL a opinion, -as-aimed at.te protection of
the mp6 ere tend the section relating.-to. the protection of.
con~mets i7as-_oniL;y 8s :.,¢.. ; . ., . - . -' -. .* .' _- -. ,-
The Melgitn me'aega.e stated that long-term equilibrium prices are,
e-~S]fl-i1eQflnrtwrati~rve. prices -for.xthe producerss. -.;-. ..* -,.
h. Cuan ;.aIzTeth'ersIass -.elecatoes -.emphasized the fact tbat, .
due to. te9.;ia:dkte .lalteri2Eivie empioynt, a: country might.hve to .,.
6 o0 pr-o.oingl c wi bcb--L t.-v-. .
The TDeiaates for Brazl2, Canada and CZeohosiO'aB sUpprtie.. -. .r'
> as;r tht! U0 d. Kined .i
Cubaz--ftdztib, -*lersae ±.he >l egate from thi ted E
epee(a ±fsxneorthe nc iet-
'no;e V; --
C+ ,:-. M . .:
-. *S. ; E/PC/T/C. 6/45
Page 6
The CHAIRMAN ended the discussion by saying that the Cuban
amendment will be included in the text of Article 41 between square
brackets. It was also decided to leave paragaphs 5 and 6 as they
stood and the Legal Drafting Sub-Committee was instructed. to improve
the Article only from the drafting point of view,
4. Considerationof Article 48
(a) The CHAIRMAN referred to the draft of the United States Delegation
proposing to strike out -.he word "primary'.
The Cuban Deleate felt that this was an important substantive
change and would allow, the inclusion of the manufactured products within
the scope of commodity arragements.
The United Statesf Delegate explained that the aim of this deletion
was only to allow the Study Group to consider semi-fabricated or substitute
products in order to determine whether special circumstances existed. After
some discussion it was decided to leave the word "primary "in,
(b) Consideration of the Australian suggestion (E/PC/T/C.6/W.49)
The Delegate of China considered. that the inclusion of specialized
agencies on the same terms as Member countries constituted a substantive
change.
The Cuban Delegate stated that there had been a great deal of discussion
on this subject in London and that the article as it now stands expresses
the opinion of the London Committee. The jurisdictional relationships
of Members and specialized agencies respectively had been defined in
London. He opposed any change.
The FAO Observer supported the Australian formulation of Article 48
but wanted, at the same time to retain Article 50. He stated that The
World Food. Proposals assigned to FAO the task of co-ordinating world
agricultural policies, and this would necessitate a greater degree of
co-operation between FAO and ITO than provided. in the London Charter.
/After some E/PC/T/C .6/45
Page 7
After some discussion the Australian Delegate withdrew his suggestion,
and it was decided to maintain the London text of Article 48, while the small
drafting changes would be dealt with by the Legal Drafting Sub-Committee .
5. Consideration of Article 49.
The committee as a whole was of the opinion that paragraph 3 of the
Article should either be amended as proposed by the United States or
deleted altogether. It was finally agreed to delete it. Otherwise the
London text was maintained.
6. Consideration of Article 50.
The FAO Observer proposed an alteration in the text which would entitle
FAO to attend or take part in the work of a Study Group or a Commodity
conference.
The Cuban Delegate was of the opinion that the text should remain
unchanged,
On the suggestion of the Canadian Delegate it was decided that the
relationship between FAO and ITO should be dealt with by special negotiation
between the two Organizations, after ITO is established.
7. Consideration of Article 51, as Redrafted by the United States Delegate.
Paragraph 1: The Delegate from Cuba objected to the change of the word
"initially" to "for an initial period".
The CHAIRMAN agreed with the Cuban Delegate and it was decided to keep
the word initially, " and delete the words '"party thereto".
Paragraph 2: Was agreed.
Paragraph 3: (Article 53, paragraph 2 of the London Charter). The
Cuban Delegate expressed his agreement with the change in place, but
preferred to maintain the text as in the London draft.
The Delegate of the United States stated that the reason for
interchanging the paragraphs (i.e., including paragraphs 2 and 3 of
.Article ,5 of the London draft into Article 51 and transferring
paragraphs 3 amd 4 of the London text to Article 53) was that the protection
of consumers was required only in regulatory agreements and not in other
/arrangements E/PC/T/C .6/45
Page 8
arrangements. In non-regulatory commodity arrangements the representation
of producers is of importance, but in regulatory agreements the important
considerations are the protection of consumers and their equal representation.
It was agreed, with Canada reserving its position, to keep paragraph 2
of Article 53 of the London Charter as it stood and to transfer it to
Article 51 .
Paragraph 4: (Paragraph 3 of Article 53 of the London text) was agreed.
Paragraph 5: (Pararaph 3 of Article 51 of the London text) was agreed.
Paragraph 6: (Paragraph 5 of Article 51 of the London text) was agreed.
Paragraph 7: On the suggestion of the Executive Secretary it was
decide to replace the words "full publicity " by "due publicity".
The Executive Secretary called the attention of the Committeeto the
Position of non-Members of ITO in commodity arrangements and to the text
of the London Report in this connection, stating that "the Drafting
Committee should specify arrangements under Chapter Vll as a exception
to the operation of Article 36." It was agreed to postpone this question
until the second session of the Preparatory Committee, when the text
of Article 36 willbe drafted, and It was further agreed to insert a note
to this effect in the report of the Drafting Committee.
The Committeeadjourned until 7 February at 10:30 a.m. |
GATT Library | xy814zy4804 | Summary Record of the Fifteenth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba Tuesday, 30 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 30, 1947 | Second Committee: Economic Development | 30/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.15 and E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.1-17 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xy814zy4804 | xy814zy4804_90180456.xml | GATT_155 | 2,017 | 13,235 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.15
ON DU 30 December 1947
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIFTEENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba
Tuesday, 30 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. E. ABELLO (Philippines)
1. ARTICLE 13: EXAMINATION OF AMENDMENTS (document E/CONF.2/C.2/22)
(continued)
Mr. SHAMMA (Lebanon) supported in principle the amendments submitted
by the delegations of India and of Turkey. He considered that a distinction
should be made between obligations assumed as a result of negotiations and
those assumued under other provisions of Chapter IV. In the case of the
latter subsequent approval should be substituted for prior.
Mr. MEURS (Netherlands) said the Netherlands delegation supported the
principle of prior approval and therefore agreed with the present draft
of Article 13.
Referring to the amendments submitted regarding the question of prior
approval, he felt the principle was generally accepted that members should
negotiate in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3. Difference of
opinion arose as to whether negotiations should take place before or after
the adoption of protective measures. A decision on that matter could not
be taken until the problem of prior approval had been solved. His
delegation strongly opposnyed a amendments which would weaken the power of
the ITO.
Mr. SKAUG (Norway) supported the remarks of the representative of
the Netherlands and the statement made at the previous meeting by the
representative of Brazil. The latter statement contained certain very
valuable ideas for improving the present draft of Article 13 and should be
submitted to a sub-committee for further study.
Mr. HANSIE (Pakistan) said his delegation could not accept Article 13
as at present drafted, and supported the amendment submitted by the
representative of India as it provided an excellent compromise.
/Mr. GOSSCHALK E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.15
Page 2
Mr. GOSSCHALK (Committee Secretary), replying to an enquiry from
Mr. ARAUJO (Colombia) said that as indicated in E/PC/T/186/Corr.1 the word
"Any" on the sixth line of page 16 of the draft Charter began a new section
which referred to all three sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1
and not merely to sub-paragraph (c).
Mr. ARAUJO (Colombia), referring to the Amendment to Article 13
submitted by the delegation of Colombia, said that his delegation was not
opposed to any other of the amendments submitted to Article 13 in so far
as those amendments made for clarification and more elasticity.
The delegation of Colombia considered that once the ITO had received
proof of certain facts supporting a country's request to maintain or impose
protective measures to develop, reconstruct or promote a certain industry,
it should, after careful study, authorize such a member to adopt those
protective measures.
Mr. Araujo referred to the wheat-producing area of Colombia and
pointed out that in order to maintain full employment in that area and
to avoid increasing the price of bread it was necessary to maintain certain
quantitative restrictions as regards imports. The provisions of Article 14
could not be applied to such a case as that Article only referred to
transitional measures.
Mr. HAIDER (Iraq) said that Articles 13 and 14 dealt with the same
subject, Article 14 with existing measures and Article 13 with future ones.
However, both Articles envisaged different kinds of measures and procedures.
Articles 13 and 14 dealt with two kinds of measures (1) measures which
were in conflict with any obligation which the Member has assumed through
negotiations, and (2) measures in conflict with other provisions of
Charter IV.
The second class could be sub-divided into four groups:
(a) existing measures which are substantially allowed by Article 14;
(b) new measures similar in nature to existing measures and intended
to solve similar problems;
(c) new measures not similar to existing measures but which are of an
urgent nature for development;
(d) measures not similar to existing ones and not of an urgent nature.
Article 13, however, tried to deal with too many points at the same
time with the result that it became exceedingly difficult to achieve
general agreement on all points. He was of the opinion that Article 13
might be broken up into two or more articles. A new Article might be
created dealing with measures in conflict with obligations assumed through
/negotiations E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.15
Page 3
negotiations, In his opinion there should be prior approval coupled with
consultation with Members for these measures.
If the Charter showed a great deal of leniency toward existing
restrictive measures, it was because it recognized the fact that there
were certain problems which countries had faced in the past and still faced
today, which required the maintenance of such restrictive measures. Under-
developed countries might be faced in the future with problems similar to
those which other countries had faced in the past and which therefore might
require similar solutions involving restrictive measures. There was no
reason why the Organization should act differently as between future and
existing measures,
With respect to urgent measures needed for development (not similar to
existing measures) the Iraq, delegate favoured a procedure along the lines
suggested by the Turkish delegation.
Miss FISHER (United, Kingdom) said that the main object of Iraq's
amendment - to ensure that the Organization would be consistent in determining
what types of measures were permissible, whether such measures were in force
or not - seemed. to be covered already by the provision in Article 14
paragraph 1, that the Organization should examine an existing measure "as if
it had been submitted. to the Organization for its concurrence under
Article 13."
Mr.MULLER (Chile), referring to the suggested new paragraphs to
Article 13 proposed by his delegation, said they sought to define the cases
in which the ITO should not refuse permission to certain countries to maintain
and. impose restrictive measures. He supported the amendment submitted by the
delegation of Colombia and the remarks made by the representative of that
country at the present meeting.
Articles of the Charter which tended to limit the sovereignty of
members of the ITO should be very carefully drafted, and the delegation of
Chile wished Chapter III to state specifically that members might appeal
against a decision taken by the Organization. For that reason it had
suggested the addition of a new paragraph 6 laying down the procedure to be
followed in such a case, and stating that members might have recourse to the
procedure outlined. in Chapter VIII.
Mr. JIJON (Ecuador) withdrew his amendment In favour of that proposed
by Mexico.
Mr. LLOSA (Peru) supported the principle of the amendments which had been
introduced at this meeting. Safeguards had to exist in case of a negative
decision from the Organization.
Mr. NYUN (Burma) explained that his amendment did not affect the
substance or general structure of Article 13. In large part, the objections
to the Article were based not on the principle of consultation with the
/Organization, E/C ONF.2/C.2/SR.15
page 4
Organization, but on the rigidity of the procedure which had been laid down.
Only principal supplying countries and not all member states should be
consulted by the Organizition and in cases where the Organization was
convinced that particular measures would not result in a restriction of
world trade, it should be free to authorize the application of such
measures before answers had been received from the member states which had
been consulted.
The CHAIRMAN stated that discussion had shown that ther was unanimity
among the delegates in recognizing the necessity of permitting Member States
to adopt non-discriminatory protective measures under certain circumstances.
There had been proposals to distinguish between cases where such measures
were incompatible with obligations assumed through negotiations pursuant
to Chapter IV and those which conflicted with other provisions of Chapter IV.
The major cleavage of opinion, however was in the requirement of prior
approval by the Organization before such protective measures could be
established. A great number of States had proposed or supported amendments
to limit or dispense with such prior approval. The present text of Article 13
had also drawn the support of several States. A further examination of the
Article with a view to reaching agreement was therefore essential.
The CHAIRMAN asked the Committee to decide whether Article 13, with its
amendments; should be transmitted to a Sub-Committee of this Committee or to
a joint Sub-Committee of the Second and Third Committees. It could be
referred to a Sub-Committee of this Committee, which would have the authority
to consult the Sub-Committee on Articles 20 and 22 of the Third Committee.
Mr. COOS (Australia), supported by the representatives of the
United kingdom; Brazil and the United States, suggested that the Chairma
should consult with the Chairman of the Third Committee as to whether there
should be a joint Sub-Committee or two separate Sub-Committees.
Mr. NOVOA (Mexico), supported by the representative of China ,
considered that the subject was one for discussion by a Sub-Committee of
Committee XI.
Mr. COOMBS (Australia) explained that the object of his original
Suggestion had been to avoid double discussion of the samc subject matter.
The Chairman of the Third Committee should be approached as to the
possibility of that Committee referring to a Sub-Committee on Articles 13
and 14, any amendments which dealt with exceptions to the provisions of
Article 20 concerning economic development.
The representative's of Norway and Czvchoslovakia supported the remarks
of the Australian representative. The representative of Mexico also
supported his suggestion on the understanding that only exceptions to the
provisions of Article 20 which exclusively concerned economic development,
isions economic develppment,
/would be E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.15
Page 5
would be referred to the Sub-Committee of the Second Committee.
Mr. MULLER (Chile) was unable to accept the point of view of the
Australian representative. The exceptions to the provisions of Article 20
should not be discussed in connection with Article 13.
At the suggestion of the Colombian representative, the Chairman said
that he would consult with the Chairman of the Third Committee and. that in
the meantime the Committee would proceed. to a discussion of Article 14.
Article 14
Miss FISHER (United Kingdom) explained that the purpose of the
United Kingdom amendment was to avoid giving an advantage to countries which
Joined the Organization at a later date, over those which joined immediately.
Mr. COCMBS (Australia) recalled that the United Kingdom proposal had
been considered in Geneva and had not been accepted. One ofthe
Justifications for safeguarding existing protective devices had been that
they were established procedures upon which administrative systems were
dependent. Under those circumstances, a country which decided. to join the
Organization in ten years' time should have the same rights concerning their
existing trade patterns.
Mr. de LEON BELLOC (Argentina) explained that his amendments were
designed to gain greater elasticity and to limit the functions of the
Organization.
Mr. TINOCO (Costa Rica) explained. that his amendments aimed at a more
flexible procedure whereby the list of products mentioned in paragaph 1 (b)
would not have to be transmitted to other governments until the Charter had
been ratified. by the constitutional organs of the countries concerned.
Secondly, a country could not be expected to implement the Charter until it
had been finally adopted by its constitutional organ and, therefore, a
similar change had been suggested. in paragraph 1 (c).
Mr. DENEL (Turkey) felt that it would be administratively difficult to
transmit the list of products on the day of general adherence to the Charter,
for the Charter would only have legal effect on the date of deposit of the
instrument of acceptance.
Mr. COPOLIA d'ANNA (Italy) said that his amendment to paragraph 1 (b)
did not differ much from the others which had been proposed. Unless some
change were made, Italy would have to postpone signing the Charter, as it
would be unable to submit a list of products before the end. of the Conference.
The representatives of Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and. Syria warmly
supported the amendment of the Turkish representative. The representative
of Costa Rica said that he would withdraw his amendment to paragraph 1 (b)
if the Turkish and Equadorian amendments were acceptable to the Committee.
The meeting rose at 12.50 p.m. |
GATT Library | mt581cq8150 | Summary Record of the Fifth Meeting Corrigendum to E/PC/T/C.6/17 | United Nations Economic and Social Council, January 31, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 31/01/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/17/Corr.1 and E/PC/T/C.6/1-20 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/mt581cq8150 | mt581cq8150_90230049.xml | GATT_155 | 84 | 770 | United Nations Nations Unies
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/17/Corr.1
AND ECONOMIQUE 31 January 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNTEID NATIONS COFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIFTH MEETING
CORRIGENDUM TO E/PC/T/C.6/17
Page 6 lines14 - 16
Sentence should read:
"The intention was that a Member in considering whether it
should eliminate existing restrictions, should decide
whether, assuming it was not applying those restrictions,
the condtions existing would entitle it to impose new
restrictions." |
GATT Library | wd400td2065 | Summary record of the Fifth Meeting : Held at Havana, Friday, 5 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 6, 1947 | Fifth Committee: Inter-Governmental Commodity Agreements | 06/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.5 and E/CONF. 2/C. 5/SR. 1-15 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/wd400td2065 | wd400td2065_90200087.xml | GATT_155 | 1,906 | 12,459 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.5
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 6 December 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FIFTH COMMITTEE: INTER-GOVERNMENTALCOMMODITY AGREEMENTS
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIFTH MEETING
Held at Havana, Friday, 5 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. George HAKIM(Lebanon) .
The CHAIRMAN proposed that the Committee continue the first reading of
Chapter VI on the understanding that any further amendments received by the
due date would be considered later
He announced that the membership of the Drafting Sub-Committee set up
at the last meeting to handle certain specific drafting points would be
expanded later and the Sub-Commitee given increased functions. This
Sub-Committee could then consider the various suggestions made during the
first reading and. endeavour to reconcile conflicting view. When the
Sub-Committee submitted its report to the full Committee, the final reading
of the Chapter would take place.
ARTICLE 53 - AMENDMENT PROPOSED BY THE DELEGATION OF ITALY
The chairman reported that in the previous meeting Article 52, 53 and
54, except 54 (c), had bean approved in first reading. However, Italy had
since proposed an amndment to Article 53, paragraph 3, and. he suggested
that this amendment should be considered before proceeding with first
reading Mr. VOGLIOLO (Italy) stated. that his amendment substituted the word
"certain" for the word" exceptional" in the first sentence of paragraph 3
He explained that this amendment was intanded to broaden the application of
commodity agreements, particularly for semi-processed products and asked
that a member of the Preparatory Committee explain the reasons for the use
of the word "exceptional".
Mr. PETER (France) explained that Article -53, paragraph 3 was intended
to take care of semi-proceesed products but to keept it under the strict
control of the Organization and that the word "exceptional" was used in
order to limit the interpretation of the paragraph especially in view of the
fact that Chapter VI is an exception to the other provisions of the Charter.
The delegate for Italy accepted the explanation and withdrew his proposal.
The CHAIRMAN announced that the explanatory note to Article 54 would be
/referred to E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.5
Page 2
referred to the Sub-Committee.
ARTICLE 55 AND ARTICLE 56, PARAGRAPH 1
Mr. COREA (Ceylon) announced that he would d propose some amendments to
Articles 55 and 56. He contended that the procedure or study groups and
Commodity Conferences appeared to involve duplication and would. cause delay.
He asked whether after a study group was established a Commodity Conference
was really necessary aud whether it should be possible to continue a study
group while its recommendations were being carried out.
There followed a discussion in which it was pointed out that although.
paragraphs 55 and 56 are closely linked, there is no requirement that there
must always be both a study group and a commodity conference. In many cases
a study group would be necessary to explore the possibilities of agreement and
to collect the necessary information on which to base an agreement, and
sometimes it might b. desirable to prelong the life of the group. However,
where countries have the basis for agreement at hand, a commodity conference
could be called immediately without resorting to the study group procedure.
It vas for the interested government to decide whether a study group was
necessary.
Mr. COREA (Ceylon) said. that these. explanations did not entirely clarify
the matter and argued that it should be possible for a study group to make an
agreement and thus dispense with a conference.
Mr. MANSOUR (Egypt) supported the delegate for Ceylon and asked. about
the functions of a study group.
Mr. SCHWENGER (United. State) said that the wording of Articles 55 and.
56 tried to express the experience of the many years ooncerning -
inter-governmental collaboration on primary commodities. It was designed to
afford the greatest possible flexibility. Study group were not intended
merely to collect statistics, but also to explore the possibility of
inter-governmental agreement. Should a study group discover the basis for
agreement immediately there was nothing in Articles 55 and 56 to prevent an
agreement being signed at once. Experience, however, had shown that agreement
was difficult of achievement, and the Articles had been drafted with that
consideration in mind. It would be futile to call a conference without first
having reached a certain degree of mutual understanding.
Mr. JIMENEZ (El Salvador), Mr. GULTIERRPZ (Bolivia), Mr. MANSOUR (Egypt)
and Mr. PARGA (Colombia) drew attention to the second alternative in
Article 56 (1), regarding members requesting a conference, and asked. about
the situation of countries whose domestick economies depend te a large extent
upon the export of one commodity but do not represent a substantial proportion
of world production, consumption or trade in that commodity The question
/was raised. E/CONF.2/C.5/SR. 5
Page 3
was raised whether one such country could ask for a conference. It seemed
unjust if one vitally interested country could not ask for a conference.
In the ensuing discussion it was stated that the wording of the draft
Charter was not intended to deprive any country of its rights, but in practice
a commodity conference would not be likely to take place unless most of the
countries affected were ready to take part.
Mr. JIMENEZ (El Salvador) asked for further consideration and requested.
more time to present hie views,
The CHAIRMAN stated. that delegations had until Saturday evening to
submit formal amendments but. the Corference had. not forbidden further
amendments ofr a consequential nature.
In the hope of meeting the view of the delegate from El Salvador,
Mr. WOULBROUN (Luxembourg). suggested an amendment to the effect that on the
basis of a request by any Member partisularly affected, the Organization
should. consult with other interested Members regarding the need for a
conference.
After some discussion it was decided to refer this proposal to the
Sub-Committee for consideration.
Articles 55 and 56, paragraph 1, were accepted on the first reading.
with the understanding that the discussion would be re-opened after the
receipt of any formal amendment.
ARTICLE 56, PARAGRAPH 2
Accepted without comment.
ARTICLE 56 - ADDITIONAL PARAGRAPH PROPOSED BY THE DELEGATION OF PERU
Mr. CHAVEZ (Peru) gave a brief explanation of his proposed amendment to
Article 56 (document C.4/4). In his opinion, members invited to a conference
concerning a commodity in which they were particularly interested. should make
every effort to re.d. a common solution. If they had previously adopted
unilateral measures in an attempt to solve their difficulties, they should be
expected to renounce those measures and submit to the decisions of the
conference.
Mr. CAPLAN (United Kingdom) stated. that he had. not had time to study the
Peruvian amendment but pointed. out that if a member had adopted unilateral
measures, in contradiction to the principles of Chapter IV, it would surely
have been reminded. or the fact-before it received. an invitation to the
conference. On the other hand., though the provisions of Chapter VI were
designed to promote a multilateral approach, they did not prohibit unilateral
action when this did not.have a harmful effect on other countries and it
would be unreasonable to-.bind a l4emer to suspend. such action.
It was decided. that in order to. give the Committee more time to consider
the proposal, discussion of the Peruvian amendment would be postponed
/ARTICLE 57 E/CONF.2/C.5/SR. 5
Page 4
ARTICLE 57
Mr. ZAFRA (Philippines) stated that his delegation would submit an
amendment at a later date. Its purpose was to strengthen the terms of
Paragraph (c) to the effect that countries participating in an agreement
should have some pocitive protection agaomst any meaeures which might be
adopted by non-participating countries against -the provisions or the said
agreement.
Subject to discussion of any formal amendments which might be submitted,
Article 57 was accepted on first reading.
Mr. JIMENEZ (El Salvador) wished. for an explantion of the difference
between the recommendations of a conference and those of a study group;
Mr.MANSOUR (Egypt) requested an explanation of the- whole of Article 58.
In reply to the representatives of El Salvador and. Egypt, Mr. PETER
(France) drew attention to excepted from the Report of the Sub-Committee on
Inter-Governmental Commodity Agreements of the second. Session of the
Preparatory Committee (contained in conference document C.5/1). The expression
control agreements" had. been used as it implied restriction of trade or the
ragulation of prices. Paragraph 3 dealt with the Organization's right to
decide whether an agreement was, or was not a control agreement that is
whether It was subject to the terms of Section C. All other agreements came
within the purview of Sections A and B .
He also pointed out that the last sentence of paragraph 6 vould perhaps
meet the views expressed by the representative of Ceylon concerning the danger
or lengthy delay before agreements could be conclured.
Mr. COREA (Ceylon) appreciated the effort to clarify the matter, but
stated that to was opposed to a reguard which stated that only in exceptional
cases could action be taken to avoid delay in the conclusion of an agreement.
Mr. LACARRA (Mexico) felt that the expression "unreasonable delay" was
obscure. He also considered that any direct negotiations between countries
under paragraph 6 should have a provisional character. until the Organization
had agreed that they should come into force.
Mr. CAPLAN (United Kingdom) said that a distinction should be drawn
between the conclusion of an agreement and. the coning into force of that
agreement. He also drew attention to the last sentence of paragraph 5, and-
suggested that it be redrafted by the Sub-Committee so as to ensure a smooth
transition to a commodity control agreement when minimum price provisions
become operative.
Mr. JIMENEZ (El Salvador) asserted that if a conference could only make
recomendations which were dependent on subsequent parliamentary action,
another. procedure would. have to be laid down - that is the method of direct
negotiations. E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.5
Page 5
Mr. DE VRIES (Netherlande) pointed one that a dietinetion must be made
between the recomendation of a study group and that of a conference. It had
certainly boon the intention of the Preparatory Committee that countries
repressented at a conference would make definite commitments. The last
sentence of paragraph 6 was mean to indiate that the ITO must be closely
concerned with agreements reached by direct negotiation. It was especially
important for the ITO to be closely concerned with commodity agreements in
view of the fact that in some respects these agreements represented a departure
from the provisions of Chapter IV of the Charter. He referred to the need
for a Commodity Commission within the ITO.
Mr. McCARTHY (Australia) pointed. out that the conference was the most
important state in the negotiation for a commodity agreement It was here
that the agreement was concIuded except for necessary government ratification,
The escape clause provided in paragraph 6 was intended to take care of
exceptional circumstances where a conference found it impossible to reach
agreement, for example, because of a relatively few dissenting governments.
After further discussion concerning the use of the word. "recommended"
in paragraph 6, and the possibility of substituting the word "decided", it
was a agreed to refer the metter to the Sub-Committee, together with the
Suggestion of the delegate for Chine that the first sentence of paragraph 6
should. read as follows:
"The members shall enter into a new commodity Control Agreement
only through a conference called in accordance with Article 56."
This completd the first reading of Article 58.
The meeting rose at 7.15 p.m. |
GATT Library | np729mj0118 | Summary Record of the Fifth Meeting : Held at Lake Success, New York, at 10:30 a m., on Friday, 24 January 1947 | United Nations Economic and Social Council, January 27, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 27/01/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/17 and E/PC/T/C.6/1-20 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/np729mj0118 | np729mj0118_90230048.xml | GATT_155 | 2,052 | 13,337 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/17
AND ECONOMIQUE 27 January 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITEE OF THE UNITED NATIONS
CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIFTH MEETING
Held at Lake Succesa, New York, at 10:30 a m., on Friday, 24 January 1947
The CHAIRMAN suggested that the Legal and, Drafting Sub-Committee be
composed of members of the Belgian, Cuban, French, United Kingdom and
United. States Delegations.
Mr. PHILLIPS (AUSTRALIA) suggested that the Sub-Committee should be
entitled "Legal Drafting Sub-Committee" rather than "Legal and Drafting
Sub-Committee". He explained that he wished this change to be made in order
to stress that the function of the Sub-Committee world be to put agreed
ideas into appropriate words. Where any disagreement as to principle is
left, the matter should. not be referred to the Legal Drafting Sub-Committee,
but rather to an ad hoc drafting sub-committee. This was agreed.
The CHAIRMAN drew the Committee's attention to documents E/PC/T/C.8/W.9
and 12 which embcdied the texts of the Articles of the Charter which had
already been accepted tentatively. He asked the Committee whether there was
any further comment upon these texts.
Mr. MA (CHINA) pointed out that the new text of sub-paragraphs (a) and
(b) of paragraph (3) of Article 13 did not take into account the suggestion
he had trade to delete the phrase "subject to such limitations and conditions".
Accordingly, he sould only .accept these sub -paragraphs on the understanding
that the word "limitations" referred to no other limitation than the release
of applicant Members from their obligations under the Charter as was
stipulated in Article 13. -
~ .
.~ ~ ~ ~ M LIP E/PC/T/C.6/17
Page 2
Mr. PHILLIPS (AUSTRALIA) suggested. that in the new text of Article 6
the concluding word "maladjustment" should be changed to "disequilibrium".
Mr. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM) stated that he would. prefer to leave the
text as it stood as he understood "disequilibrium" to refer to a state of
affairs confined, to one country, whereas maladjustment referred. to a state
of affairs which extended beyond the boundaries of one country.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) agreed. with Mr. Shackle and. Mr. Phillips
said that he would not press the point.
Mr. JUSSIANT (BELGIUM-LUXEMBOURG) referred. to the reservations he had
made at a previous meeting regarding the transfer of Article 5 from Chapter III
to Chapter IV. In view of this transfer he suggested that the title of
Chapter III be amended to "Employment, Effective Demand and Economic Activity."
This was agreed. Subject to this amendment, the texts set out in the two
documents under examination were accepted provisionally.
Examinaticn, of Article 25 - General Elimination of Quantitative Restrictions.
Mr. ADARKAR (INDIA,) referred to the amendments he had proposed to
Article 25; which were embodied in document E/PC/T/C.6/W.5. He explained
that he moved, these amendments because he considered. that each Member should
be left, free to chocse the measures which it thought most appropriate for
Its economic development. Any measure which was essential to the economic
development of a particular Member should not be prohibited as set out in
the Charter, but the use of such a measure should be permitted, subject
substantially to the same procedure as was provided in Article 26 for
quantitative restrictions to safeguard the balance of payments.
The CHAIRMAN stated that Mr. Adarkar's amendments raised questions of
substance which he thought could only be passed on by the Drafting Committee
to the Second Session of the Preparatoy Committee as an alternative text
suggested by the Indian Delegation.
Mr. GUERRA (CUBA) asked Mr. Adarkar whether he would be prepared to drop
his reservation -to Article 25 if the idea behind. his amendment was covered by
/a redrafting E/PC/T/C.6/17
Page 3
a redrafting of Article 13. Mr. ADARKAR replied that if this were done there
would be no reason for any amendment to Article 25. It was decided that the
text in question should be included in the report of the Commiittee, as an
alternative to Article 13 suggested by India.
In the event of no support being forthcoming for the Indian Delegate's
propeal, the Committee commenced a detailed examination of the text of
Article 25 as presented in the Report of the First Session. It was agreed
that the word. "Member" in the last two lines of paragraph (1) should be
expanded to "Member country".
In connection with paragraph (2), Mr. SMITH (CANADA) pointed out that
it was essential to the whole economic development of Canada that the ezport
of electric power should be strictly regulated. If electric power were
regarded as a good or a commodity, he wished to reserve the position of his
Delegation regarding its export except under licence.
Mr. PHILLIPS (AUSTRALIA) queried whether the restrictions mentioned.
in the first proviso to sub-paragraph (a) (iii) of paragraph (2) referred to
new restrictions or also to restrictions in force when the Charter came
into operation.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) replied that he considered the correct
principle to be that if when the Charter cames into force a Member wishes to
maintain a restriction, he should consult with other Member which are
interested.
It was agreed that the United States and Australian Delegates might
confer with a view to producing a text which better embodied this principle.
Mr. GUIRRA (CUSA) asked what would follow after the Organization made
a request under sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph (2) to a Member to revise
standards.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) stated that if a Member declined to act upon
the Organization's request, the case right fall within paragraph (2) of
/Article 35. E/PC/T/C.6/17 Page 4
Article 35. However, it would. be impracticable for the Organization to
order any Member to revise its standards.
Mr. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM) suggested that the words "or of a directly
compertitive product which may be mareked or produced" should be added to
the and of sub-paragraph (e) (i) of paragraph (2).
Mr. SUEREA (CUSA) remarked that Mr. Shackle's suggestion invclved a
question of substance which had been discussed at length at the First Session.
He went on to point out that products may be competing for the same market
and yet may be entirely different in fcra.
Mr. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM) asked that his suggestion be either noted
in the Drafting ''Committe's report or placed in the text in square brackets.
This was agreed..
Mr. ADARKAR (INDIA) referred to his suggsted amendments of
sub -paragraph (e) (i) and (ii) which were embodied in document E/PC/T/C.6/W.16
and pointed out that there was nothing in the Charter to prevent governments
from adepting schems to regulate agricultural production. To make these
schemes effective, a government should necessarily have the power to control
Messrs. GUERRA (CUSA) and BREBNER (NEW ZEALAND) opposed the Indian
Delegate's suggestions as providing too wide a loophole in the Charter.
The CHAIRMAN, seeking as Delegate for Norway, stated that, as on some other
points in the Charter, he had not received any instructions from his
Government regarding Article 25 and therefore he could. not express an opinion
at this stage on the subject of the reservation which the Forvegian Delegation
had made at the First Session of the, Preparatory Committee.
/It was agreed. E/PC/T/C .6/17
Page 5
It was agreed that as no support was forthcoming for the Indian
delegate's proposal, the text of the Charter should be maintained and the
Indian delegate's proposal forwarded as on alternative.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) suggested that as paragraph (4) of
Article 27 covered the last sentence of sub-paragraph (f) of paragraph (2),
he thought that that sentence night be delotod. However, after Mr. SMITH
(CANADA) quoried the advisability of deleting this sentence, Mr. Leddy
withdrew his proposal.
Mr. MA (CHINA) pointed out that like Mr. Colben he had not received
instructions from his Government on many of the points raised in the
Charter. He did not wish the Drafting Committee to think that his silence
on any particular point necessarily implied approval.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) suggested that as sub-paragraph (g) of
paragraph (2) was covered by the general exceptions in Article 37, this
sub-paragraph might be deleted. However, it was agreed not to delete
sub-paragraph (g) at the present time, but to consider the matter further
after the Technical Sub-Committee had dealt with Article 37.
THE CHAIRMAN asked the Drafting Committee whether those delegations
which had entered reservations to Article 25 at the First Session of the
Preparatory Committee wished to maintain them. Mr. ALVAREZ (CHILE) said
that he had not received instructions from his government and therefore must
ask that the Chilean delegation's reservation be regarded as maintained.
The CHAIRMAN directed. Mr. TORRES² (BRAZIL) attention to the suggestion
which the Brazilian delegation had made at the First Session in lonion to
Use quantitative restrictions for the preservation of scarce natural
resoures.
Mr. TORRES stated that he might be able to present the Drafting Committee
with a paper on this point at a lator stege. MR. JUSSIANT (BELGIUM-LUXEMBOURG) 3G)
Eated that he might also present the Committing cnittee with a paper
roegard.!mthonon-inposition of restrictions upon soasenal csmmoditieo.
/Sub ect to tho E/PC/T/C. 6/17
Page 6.
Subject to the amendments mentioned. above. the Drafting Committee
provisionelly accepted the text of Article 25 as drafted. in the Charter.
Examination of Article 26 - Rescrictions to Safeguard. the Balance of Payments
The Drafting Committee examined the United States redraft of Article 26
set out in document E/PC/T/C .6/W.11 In paragraph (1) of this redraft it
was agreed that the word "and" in lines two and nino should be provisionally
altered to "or'. ln paragraph (2). of the same redraft it was agreed. also
to restore the word "to" before 'forestall" in line ten and. to alter
"its level of, monetary reserves" to "the level of its monetary. reserves"
in line eleven. It was also agreed. to insert in line fourteen after the
word. "made" the phrase "in each case".
Mr. PHILLIPS (AUSTRALIA) raised the question whether the redraft of
sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph (2) really expressed what it was desired to
say. The intention was that a Member in considering whether it should
eliminate restrictions should consider whether the conditions which obliged
it to impose the restrictions in the past existed. any longer. It was
agreed that this. sub-paragraph should be referred to the Legal Drafting
Sub-Committee which might endeavour to find more appropriate words.
In reply to a query by ons delegate Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) explained
that in sub-paragraph (c) of. paragraph (2) the word "apply" covered.
impose, maintain or intensify".
As regards sub-paragraph (c). of paragraph (2) Messrs. BENDA
(CZECHOSLOVAKIA) and. ALVAREZ (CHILE) expressed preference for the text
produced at the First Session of the Preparatory Committee as they
considered the United States redraft was more rigid.
Messrs. GUERRA (CUBA) and SMITH (CANADA) supported the United States
redraft of this sub-paragraph as batter expressing this intention of the
First Session of the Preparatory Commiittee. Mr. GUERRA also stated that
if the Cuban delegation had not understood that the sub-paragraph. had the
mening which was embodiedd. in the United. States redraft, it would have made
/reservations in London. E/PC/T/C. 6/17
Page 7
reservations in London. Mr. LUXFORD (INTERNATIONAL BANK) pointed out that
it had never been the understanding at the First Session of the Preparatory
Committee that there was any difference between new and existing
restrictions.
The United States draft of sub-paragraph C of paragraph 2 was
adopted with the understanding that the report should indicate that the
delegates for two countries preferred. the London draft.
Mr. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM) stated that he preferred the words
"as soon as possible" in sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph (3) as in the
text produced in London to the word "immediately" as in the United States
redraft.
After Messrs. GUERRA (CUBA) and SMITH (CANADA) had supported the use
of the word "immediately" in this sub-paragraph and Mr. PHILLIPS (AUSTRALIA)
had adopted the opposite position, it was agreed that the substitution of
"immediately" for "as soon as possible" should be accepted provisionally.
Subject to the amendment above mentioned, the United States redraft
of paragraphs (1) and (2) end sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph (iii) of
Article 26 was accepted tentatively.
It was agreed that the next meeting of the Drafting Committee should
be held at 10.30 a.m. on 27 January 1947. |
GATT Library | cx924td8876 | Summary Record of the Fifth Meeting : Held at Lake Success on 13 February 1947, 2.45 p.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 14, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee, and Sub-Committee on Tariff Negotiations | 14/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/79 and E/PC/T/C.6/73-85/CORR.1 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/cx924td8876 | cx924td8876_90230145.xml | GATT_155 | 734 | 5,073 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/79
AND ECONOMIQUE 14 February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL. ET SOCIAL. ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE ON TARIFF NEGOTIATIONS
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIFTH MEETING
Held at Lake Success on 13 February 1947, 2.45 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. B. N. ADARKAR
Correction. E/PC/T/C.6/67 page 2, line 3 from below: delete the word.
"Nor-way". .
The Sub-Comattee continued the discussion of .
Article ggVI. Anothper fc-note was suc-te)d to eaagraph 2, (C.6/W.58, y
the United States Delegawte and the following text as approved:
"It is also cctemlated that there would be included at- n
appropriate place in the Agreement undertakings designed to
preventp the nullification or imoairment of the benefits f
thehe tariff concessionws of t Agreement which ould result from
any reclassification of' products at higher rates of. duty than
those providecor in the Schedulesgh. Such undertakings mi_
take the form.
either of provisio nsdesigned to prevent-uch reclassification
enfetirely, during the li or the Agreement, or to prevent
the imposition of hi Cer duties resulting-rom such
reclassification or -
in cases where neitherQfthese two courses might be
practicable, of provisions for negotiations to restore
the previous balance between concessions and counter-
concessions".
/Paragraphs E/PC/T/C.6/79
Page 2
Paragraphs 2 and 3 (Article 32 of the Charter). It was agreed that
these paragraphs should. be incorporated in the General Agreement.
Article XIV. (Article.31 of the Chapter). The incorporation of this Article
in the General Agreement was approved.
Article VII. The Secretariat suggested (C.6/65/Rev.2) to include the first
part of this Article in the Preamble. The Sub-Committee, while approving the
Article, decided to return to it after the Preamble had been considered.
Article VIII. (Article 25 of the Charter). The square brackets in paragraph
were deleted and the language "or if necessary in subsequent period or period,
was inserted at the end. of the proviso. The whole proviso was transferred to
Article X. paragraph 3: (b).
The Sub-Committee approved of the incorporation of this Article in the
General Agreement.
Article IX. (Article 26 of the Charter). In paragraph 7 the words "in early
years" were replaced by "during the next few years".
The Sub-Committee approved of the incorporation of this Article in the
General Agreement.
Article X. (Article 27 of the Charter), Article XI. (Article 28 of the
Charter), Article XII. (Article 29 of the Charter). It was decided to
incorporate these Articles in the General Agreement.
Article XIII. (Article 30, paragraph 1 of the Charter). Article XIII was
incorporated in the General Agreement. The Sub-Committee will return to the
rest of Article 30 after having considered. the wording of the Declaration.
Article IV. (Article 13 of the Charter), Article XVI. (Article 34 of the
Charter), Article XVII. (Article 35 of the Charter), Article XIX. (Article 3
of the Charter). It was decided to incorporate these Articles in the General
Agreement.. Article XX. was discussed in the light of the Secretariat paper
(C .6/65/Rev.2). It was agreed to incorporate this Article in the General
Agreement in the following wording:.
/Article XX E/PC/T/C. 6/79
Page 3
Article XX
Functions and Stracture of Interim Trade Committee
1. The Interim Trade Committee shall consist of one representative
from each of the contracting parties.
2. The Committee is authorized to perform such functions as are
specifically provided for in the other provisions of this Agreement,
and generally to perform any other functions which may be appropriate
for the full Implementation of this Agreement and of its accompanying
Declaration.
3. Each representative on the Committee shall have one vote.
4. SubJect to the provisions of paragraph 5 decisions of the Committee
shall be taken by a majority of the representatives present and
voting.
5. The Committee may by a vote of two-thirds of its members,
adopt criteria and procedure for waiving, in exceptional circumstances,
obligations incured under this Agreement.
6. The Committee may be dissolved by agreement among the contracting
parties upon the establishment of the International Trade Organization.
It was also agreed to add a footnote saying that provisions may have
to be made for contributions to meet the expenses of the Interim Trade
Committee.
The Chairman requested the Secretariat, when drafting the General
Agreement, to take into consideration all alternative texts and changes
adopted by the Drafting Committee, and all reservations made by the
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-h
Delegations.
Next meeting:. 14 February, 2:45 p.m. |
GATT Library | yb491yg7011 | Summary Record of the Fifth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba Friday, 5 December 1947, at 10,30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 5, 1947 | First Committee: Employment and Economic Activity | 05/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.1/SR.5, E/CONF.2/C.1/C/1-4, and C.1/SR.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/yb491yg7011 | yb491yg7011_90180276.xml | GATT_155 | 2,346 | 15,239 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE UNRESTRICTED
ON DU E/CONF.2/C.1/SR.5
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 5 December 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FIRST COMMITTEE: EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIFTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba
Friday, 5 December 1947, at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. J. J. DEDMAN (Australia)
1. CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION OF ARTICLE 3 AND SUBSEQUENT ARTICLES IN
CHAPTER II ON THE BASIS OF THE AMENDMENTS CONTAINED IN DOCUMENT
E/CONF.2/C.1/3 WITH ADDENDA 1 AND 2
Article 3 - Maintenance of Domestic Employment - proposed new paragraph 3
(continuation of discussion)
Mr. LEROY (Haiti) felt that there was a close connection between the
Problems of employment and international trade, and therefore not all questions
5iDcemerntoa tr7,ade030am
regarding reemploymenILOt should be referd to the . -
Article 4 -Fair Labour Standards
M'sra.e Perez MARTINEZ (Argentina) said his delegation mndment was
based on the view that there should be equitable conditions of work in all
sectors of production. The principles of the Charter should be applied to
all workers, whether or not they were engaged in production for export.
Mr. MAHAVA (Ceylon) and Mr. lNE(Pru) pointed out that their
delegationahl so submitted amenduLntto Article 4 which supported
the views expressed by the representative of Argentina.
Mr. OYm(France) consisdered there was no discrepancy of aubtance.
beefg tha Agentine pgroposal and the present wordin of Article 4. He
pointed ou that the first Arge ntine amendment did not apply-o the French
text since the Fench text of the Geneova draft already referred, tQwages.
or remnertion.
eReferring to the second Ar tineil amendment, and to the simlr
am,endment proposed by Ceyonfhe said that after discussion in .he
PeparatoryoCo i ttee it thad been odeciid ed to mainLin the wrds nthe
pres stereyf iis hadben laid striesobe euse theyxport induix caW I.
we re the ones relatedto international trade. ..-
ML(United Kingdom) E/CONF.2/C.1/SR.5 Page 2
Mr. SHACKLE (United Kingdom) agreed with the representative of France
and preferred the amendment submitted by the Argentine delegation to that
submitted by the representative of Ceylon.
The CHAIRMAN considered that the matter should be referred to the
drafting Committee which would be set up later.
Mr. BURGUETE (Mexico) agreed in principle with the remarks made by
the representatives of Argentina, ceylon and Peru.
Mr. LIEU (China) agweed with the remarks of the French representative.
Labour conditions were not the concern of the International Trade
Organization except insofar as they had to do with international trade.
Mr. van VELDEN (Union of South Africa) said his delegation was
troubled by the vague and loose phraseology of Article 4 whicl would be
made more difficult of interpretation by the addition of the words "wages
and" proposed in the Argenaine amendment. When "sub-standard" conditions
of labour or wages were referoed to there must be some definite standard.
Conditions differed widely in various countries, and it was difficult to
see how any standard could be adopted on which there might be a medium
of agreement.
The International Labogr Organization had endeavoured over a long
period of time to lay down standards but so far no uniform standard had
emerged, and the International Trade Organization would experience the
same difficulties. -
Mr.vazVelden sacomplaicnmttio dered that eozplaints udr
Article should be referred to the International Labour Organization,
which would remain in close contact with the International Trade <
Orgeanizatio, TheUn'ellgtion ohf the aVjn lof Soutg fric wouddintroduce
an amendmentto'hat effect at a later stage.
exic,), re ferrnir.og 'te r ho ?semkaofe -eprtsentorpveleEt4io -
of France and of the United Kingdom, quoted from S ectCiaon Dof hpter I
o n pae ge 5ofthfReport o the first session of the Preparamitory, Comttee
His de flegationelt that if it were possible to fixn trhe stadad of fair
l abour insthe way uggested during discussions in the PrepCaratory ommittee,
it shounld be doe.
RMr. ROY (France), referring to the remarks of thee tareperesntivb
noof tof Sohe Uifni a, uth Aed outrc point that then oquestisto df sub-anard
co on daitio nas sfalbourwd coelt withmprehensivehely d afi ofn t Rert the
/Sub-Coomitattee II, ni Chperwhch at t has knt timewChapter III.aown as
From orthia tou Rept setwlt dt be er'hathe poblneimi osf of lacourdton bo
in their relation to the productilabovitwy ocf uelr inkea s lhosyldwit
/the work carried. E/CONF.2/C.1/SR.5
Page 3
the work carried out in that field by the ILO. He considered that the Report
of the Sub-Committee should be placed at the disposal of representatives.*
U KYIN (Burma) said that instead of undertaking merely to eliminate
sub-standard conditions of labour, the Conference should aim at securing for
labour higher levels of wages and better conditions of work.
The CHAIRMAN said that amendments numbers 1 and 3 submitted by the
delegation of Ceylon would be submitted to the proposed Drafting Committee.
Mr. ROYER (France) said his delegation agreed in principle with the
amendment submitted by the representative of Ceylon. He wished to know,
however, whether the ILO was receiving the information provided for under
the second amendment proposed by the delegation of Ceylon. If so, then the
agreement to be made between the ITO and the ILO should include a provision
making it possible for information to be passed on from the ILO to the ITO.
Mr. TAIT (International Labour Organization) stated that the ILO received
full information concerning action taken in the various countries with regard
to fair labour standards and labour standards generally. He suggested that
the proposal made. by the representative of France that the matter should
later be made the subject of an agreement between the ITO and the ILO might
be given careful consideration.
Mr. BURGUETE (Mexico) pointed out that in the amendment to the final
sentence in Article 4 proposed by his delegation the last sentence of the
original draft beginning "Members which are also..." had been inadvertently
omitted.
Mr. ROYER (France) said there was a discrepancy between the French and
English texts of the amendment. In the French text reference was made to
"another" member country, and in the English text the word used was "a"
member country. He wished to know the exact scope and meaning of the Mexican
proposal.
Mr. BURGUETE (Mexico) said that according to the original text in Spanish
the French translation; i.e., "another" member country was correct.
The CHAIRMAN, referring to the amendment to Article 4, proposed by the
delegation of Peru, said that as that had already been discussed, the
Committee would pass to the consideration of a proposed new paragraph.
Proposed new paragraph to Article 4
Mr. BURGUETE (Mexico) wished to make it clear that it was not the
purpose of his delegation to introduce any element of political discussion.
The Mexican Government had always endeavoured to include in agreements and
treaties stipulations intended to impede discriminatory practices. In
the League of Nations Mexico had always protested against any discriminatory
* See document E/CONF .2/C.1/5
/laws regarding E/CONF. 2/C.1/SR. 5
Page 4
laws regarding labour. In presenting its amendment, the delegation of
Mexico wished to make it clear that there should be equality of treatment
and opportunity for all who by their labour contributed to the development
of a country.
Mr. FRESQUET (Cuba), referring to the proposal submitted by the
delegation of Mexico, said that the Constitution of Cuba had already
fulfilled most of the obligations which would be entailed by the amendment.
The delegation of Cuba could not accept the amendment proposed by
the representative of Mexico in its entirety because it might involve an
amendment to the Constitution. He felt that the matter should be dealt
with by the ILO.
Mr. OTANEZ (Venezuela) viewed with pleasure the amendment proposed
by the delegation of Mexico. In the Constitution of Venezuela provision
was made for equal wages for equal work without any distinction as to race,
sex or religion.
In supporting the Mexican amendment, the delegation of Venezuela did
not wish to prejudge the question as to whether the matter should be the
object of a provision in the Charter of the ITO or whether it should be
referred to the ILO for study.
Mr. MAHADEVA (Ceylon) felt that his delegation might not be in a
position to give unreserved support to the amendment proposed by the
delegation of Mexico since in his country legislation might be introduced
requiring non-national firms to employ a certain proportion of nationals.
That might be contrary to the suggestions embodied in the proposed amendment.
Mr. LIEU (China) referred to a previous amendment submitted by by
the Mexican delegation, and considered that it showed a certain amount
of discrimination. He felt that the new paragraph 3 to Articles 3 and 4
proposed by the delegation of Mexico, should rre referred to a sub-committee
for clarification.
The CHAIRMAN said the proposal of the representative of China would
be considrede later when the question of sub-committees was dealt with.
Mr. ROYER (France) fully supported the principle of equal conditions
of work for all, and his country had gone far in its legislation towards
implementing this principle. If, however, the proposed amendment were
adopted, then many States might have to adapt and adjust their legislation
in this regard before ratifying the Charter. This would entail a great
deal of delay. The representative for Mexico had said that although these
principles were embodied in the Constitution of the ILO they were not
universally respected. The ITO could not hope to accomplish in a few
/months that E/CONF.2/C .1/SR. 5
Page 5
months that which the ILO had not accumulished in a quarter of a century.
He hoped that the Mexican delegation would agree to some compromise formula,
and tentatively put forward the following "The maintenance of fair labour
standards for all workers in relation to their productivity".
Mr. OTANEZ (Venezuela) while supporting the Mexican proposal, did
not consider that the absence of discrimination in fixing salaries etc.
should prevent countries from making reservations with regard to percentages
of national workers.
Mr. FER (Turkey) thought that practical difficulties might be
encountered in applying the Mexican amendment. The formulation of such
an important legal principle required to be accompanied by a study of
conditions in the different countries made by the competent specialized
agency, i.e., the ILO.
Mr. SKAUG (Norway) was in favour of the principle embodied in the
Mexican amendment. The economic and social history of Norway had shown
that his country. had tried to follow up this pr nciple and put it into
practice. However, he viewed with some alarm the tendency to write into
the Charter what almost amounted to an international labour code more
appropriate to the ILO. The employment provisions of Charter should relate
primarilyfto the volume of employment and its effect on international
demand and trade. , . .
II Mr. BGU=.eic) maintained that Chapter.11 shouither include
all the specific points with regard to employment or should be entirely
dabandonedand.eferred to the n1aUn thr agencies -of th United Nations.
The CHAIRMAN invited the representative of Haiti to speak to his
amendment.
Mr. LOY (Haiti) considered that the considerations listed in the
Haitian amement met most of the objections that had been raised. n the
discussion of the Mexican amendment. The principle of non-discrimination
as regards eploymnt .smed t o be supported by many ofthe representatives.
preent. Tbcpni permeated the whole Charter, and appeared in the
iCeharter of thenlt Nations itself.
Mr. ruguCHO - R (ay) referring to the amendment proposed by his
delegation regarded Articlpe 4 toas oposed social dumping, and to a
country exportiwng its on poverty. The advanc ced s foocialoe- his country
inecreasseodth cot f production, and countries which had adopted such a
d be cootde ou lJecnted.aaist the competition of production obtained
under lower labour standards.
ACKL S:E Cc E/CONF.2/C .1/SR .5
Page 6
Mr. SHACKLE (United Kingdom) considered that the Uruguayan amendment
tended to introduce an exception of undefined scope.
Mr. ROYER (France) said that this question of "social dumping" had
been discussed at length at the New York meeting, but it had finally been
considered that it would be very dangerous to embody such a vague
recommendation in the Charter. He drew the attention of the representative
for Uruguay to Articles 89 and 90 of the Geneva Draft, which provided for
procedure to which recourse could be had by injured countries, and also
for sanctions in cases where social dumping was proven.
Mr. BURGUETE (Mexico) supported the Uruguayan amendment, which was
complementary to the Mexican amendment.
Mr. CHOUHY TERRA (Uruguay) considered that the procedure established
under Articles 89 and 90 was long and complicated and difficult to apply.
Mr. LIEU (China) thought that in the first place, the amendment
proposed by the representative for Uruguay was too indefinite and
constituted an escape clause which was very wide. In the second places
the price of a product was not solely determined by wages. Finally, he
agreed with the representative of the United Kingdom that this amendment
would be a fertile source of disputes.
Mr. FRESQUET (Cuba) supported the observations made by the
representative for China.
Mr. PIERSON (United States of America) thought that the Uruguayan
amendment seemed to introduce a sweeping escape clause, which his
delegation had been unwilling to concede in a different matter, i.e., in
the case of a country being injured by external deflationary pressure. He
thought Articles 89 and 90 covered the contingencies which were envisaged
in this regard.
With regard to the other amendments which had been discussed, his
delegation had not proposed to submit any amendment, and would have been
prepared to accept the Article as it stood. However, the discussion of
the amendments which had been submitted had brought to light some very
interesting ideas. He would now for instance be prepared to delete the
specific reference to "production for export". He thought that the
various amendments should be studied, and that a further provision might
be added dealing with the principle of free and voluntary labour. He read
a preliminary draft intended to cover the various points and indicated that
he would shortly submit a more formal draft to the Secretariat for
circulation.
The meeting rose at 1.15 p.m. |
GATT Library | dj251mf8603 | Summary Record of the Fifth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 4 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 4, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 04/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.5 and E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/dj251mf8603 | dj251mf8603_90190218.xml | GATT_155 | 2,340 | 15,380 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.5
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 4 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIFTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba,
on 4 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. D. L. WIlGRESS (Canada)
1. CONTINUATION OF GENERAL DISCUSSION OF CHAPTER IV/
Mr.NnAHS (New Zealand) observed that a more equal standard of living
for all the peopl oOf the worl wdas the one problem with which this
Conference wa fsaced. Today countries more advanced industrially and
economically had a new outlook in their realization and acceptance of
responsibility toward the peoples of areas with a lower standard of living;
their objective was the utilization and development of the resources of
these areas for the benefit of these peoples of those areas, rathe rthan
their exploitation as in the past. The present tendency was not to encourage
migration to areas having a higher standard of living, though that might be
one solution to the problem.
The Draft Charter seemed to him the fairest set of. rules yet drafted
governing international trade. Within these rules, the main objective should
be the sharing of the resources of the world. It had been said that the more
industrialized countries had been able to develop their economies because
of high tariff protection, but were enw placing countries which aspire dto
industrial development at a disadvantage by advocating the lowering of
tariffs. But the maintenance of high tariffs might lead to the development
of uneconomic forms of industrialization. He believed that it was possible,
within the terms of the Draft Charter, to improve standards of living,
and he hoped that restrictive import practices would not be adopted for
building up industries.
Since 40 per cent of New Zealand's production was exported, his
countryw as vitally interested in a Charter for international tradew hich
could be signed without qualifications and whose provisions could be-
observed. He cited the assets, the state activities, and the absence of
poverty in New Zealand. New Zealand had instituted exchange control by
licensing all imports in order to ensure that they could meet their
/commitments and maintain E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.5
Page 2
commitments and maintain their monetary reserves. At Geneva his delegation
had stated that if their situation was considered to come within the balance
of payments provisions, they could agree to the principle of
non-discriminatory trade, except for certain preferences already permitted
under the Draft Charter.
The quantitative restrictions applied by New Zealand did not restrict
the total volume of trade, and merely enabled the Government to ensure
that essential goods would be imported.
New Zealand was vitally affected by the subsidy provisions of the
Charter in view of its guaranteed price procedure for primary producers,
bulk sales contracts and guaranteed wage provision. The Charter permitted
the maintenance of such a system. The system of guaranteed prices and
bulk sales had resulted in a low cost structure and in a smiler increase
in the cost of living than in other countries. Theirs was an economy of
expansion, there were no restrictions on production; and the import
restrictions which they wished to continue he believed to be covered by
Article 12 of the General Agreement and by Article 21 of the Draft Charter.
Mr. MORESCO (Argentina) considered that Chapter IV, as it now stood,
tended to consolidate the economies of highly developed countries to the
detriment of others. The less developed countries must have freedom to
adopt protective measures for development purposes.
Article 16, which embodied the m-f-n principle, included exceptions
for the benefit of certain countries and perpetuated discriminatory
practices condemned elsewhere. Those exceptions should be made more
equitable by the inclusion of complementary economic regions. .
His country had proposed modifications to the Charter to ensure that
its right of free determination would not be diminished. The functions of
the proposed Organization should be limited solely to study, co-ordination
and recommendations of an advisory nature.
The Articles regarding quantitative restrictions, balance of payments
and exchange arrangements would necessitate joining the International
monetary Fund or the conclusion of a special exchange agreement. Argentina
would not fulfil either of these provisions, since its present system of
exchange control was required for its economic development and the
difficulties of international payments required such regulatory measures.
He referred to Dr. Molinari's statement during the Plenary Session
regarding State Trading, explaining that Argentina does not agree with
the provisions of the Charter owing to her necessity of maintaining the
regulation of her economy.
/TheCharter admitted E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.5
Page 3
The Charter admitted the survival of dumping by attempting to regulate
it. Every effort should be made to eradicate such practices.
The problem of synchronizing the desires of all countries was complex;
during the study of Chapter IV the principle that the right of each country
should not exceed the rights of all countries should be constantly kept
in mind.
2. DETI EXAMINATION OF CHAPTER IV -
The CEAIRMAN stated that the first edition of the Annotated Agenda
(E/COW-.2/C.3/1), containing 136 items, would be the working paper for the
first reading; the second edition would be circulated after 6 December.
He proposed there be a first reading of each Article and where there, was
the wide divergence of mpinion, and ad hoc sub-comnittee could be formed.
Ee stressed that this procedure would not indicate either acceptance or
rejection of an Article. There would be a second reading at which time
furthe. opportunity would be given for expression of views,
This procedure was approved.
The CHAImmAN pointed out that the General Committee had reco='ended
that if at so clearible the text of the Charter should be made 96Ccleax
that no interpretative notes would be required; however, if some notes
were unavoidable, they should be an integral part of the text of the
Charter. (E/CONF.2/BUR.5).
Referring to the first item on the Agenda, the general note concerning
Article 16 sncluded in the Geneva report, he mentioned that thin appeared
as an Annex to paragraph 3 or Article 1 of the General Agreement, which
had been signed by twenty-three governments.
Wt. 1ORTON (Australia) stated it had been found difficult to frame
these comme cial policy Articles without such notes, and it had-been agreed
at'Gene a tcat insorder to allow for certain administrative:propedureq,
this particular note should be incorporated.
' A1cIs' A1 (Czchoslovakia) thought it better to.disquqs;the
Article a8 a whole before attempting to determine whether the note was
necessary.
AGREE.
Mr. MQRESCO (Argentina) explained that his amendment was submitted
in crder thftrertticle 16 should recognize the.,eed for preierQnial
arregements- thmpe part of all member states whose economie.soPPment
each other, . --
Mr. SIB (Bgum) thought the first' parto9f theam!dm~ pt efea
tH purpose of..e Article in that it advocated a conditional m-ffin
treatment rather than an unconditional one. A conditional clause would
/hamper the restoration of E/CONF.2/C.3/81.5
Page 4.
hamper the restoration of a multilaateral trade system.
The second part of the amendment was difficult to discuss without
considering at the same time other amendments on that subject. He
recognized the particular situation of the Latin American countries and
of the Arab states, but felt that the Argentine proposal allowed too general
an exception. It should be the aim to have a realistic Charter with
specific exceptions and conditions, as had been advocated by Mr. Coombs
yesterday (vid. E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.4, pages 5 - 6).
Mr. ROYER (France) agreed with the representative of Belgium; like the
United States his country had adopted unconditional m-f-n treatment after
1918 and was obligated to it under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
Negotiations for tariff reductions with new members would be based on
mutual advantages and reciprocal concessions, under Article 16.
Mr. STUCKI (Switzerland) shared the views of the representatives of
Belgium and France concerning the first part of the amendment.,
Mr. SHACKLE (United Kingdom) pointed to the proposed addition of the
word "member" which would exclude the extension to Members of benefits
granted to non-members. He felt this alteration to be fundamental and
difficult to contemplate. This view was supported by Mr. ENTEZAM (Iran).
Mr. MULLER (Chile) stated that the decision taken on the amendment
to Article 15 submitted by his delegation would govern his action on the
Argentine proposal concerning Article 16.
Mr. PARRA (Mexico) while entirely supporting unconditional m-f-n
treatment, stated that his position regarding Article 16 as a whole was
dependent upon the action taken in regard to paragraph 2.
Mr. GUERRA (Cuba) stated that his delegation would submit an amendment
to. Article 16 concerning customs classifications as they affected the m-f-n
clause. He pointed out that it was possible for a country to introduce
discrimination by making a distinction between various types of a product
and thus preventing general extension of a reduction granted on any one type.-
Answering.an :enquiry ofMIr. ZORLU (Turkey) concerning the -
interpretation of the term "like product" RMhe CHAI4AN used the example of
two categories of automobile, those weighing less than 1500 kilos and those
weighing more than that. A reduction of the tariff on automobiles in the
former category would if granted to country X also have to be granted to
other countries for automobiles in the same :category but in such a case
the term "like product" would not, as he understood it, include automobiles
weighing more than 15.00 kilos-.
- n *. /Mr. HAM (Lebawon) . E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.5
Page 5
Mr. HAKIM (Lebanon) stated the reservation made by his delegation in
Geneva applied only to its interest in regional exceptions and did not
mean that they disagreed with the principle of the unconditional m-f-n
clause. He pointed out that the advantages to be granted in paragraph 1
had to do with customs duties and charges; if advantages granted were of
another character, there was no obligation to extend to members concessions
made to non-members.
Mr. ROYER (France) called the attention of the future Drafting
Committee to the text of the General Agreement which embodied the text
of Article 16 of the Draft Charter in improved form.
On a request for clarification of the. statement of the representative
of Lebanon made by Mr. JIMENEZ (El Salvador) the CHAIRMAN stated that the
Article was much broader in scope than the matter of customs duties and
he quoted paragraph 1 in full to illustrate this.
The CHAIRMAN stated that as there was no support for the Argentine
proposal on paragraph 1 it was now in order to pass on in first reading to
paragraph 2. As there were five amendments seeking further preferences
and one proposing deletion of a preference he considered that paragraph 2
was suitable for discussion by a sub-committee. ,
ER. 'LMAS (Colombia) asked whether it would be possible to discuss
paragraph 2 of Article 16 at the same time Committee ssII w discussing
Article 15 in view of the inter-relationship of th. HeEthoughwoH tt no
pionrssqul~so be made in Article 16 for new preferences ife t~ime . .
o A Aaaisticle was, while granting a tem or arytol ra Ttceo existing
preferences,eventually to achieve their abolition. The ICHARMAgrN aeed to
9uln tngtthis point with the,h mamrnaof Committee. .,I,
JIMjIMZEB(El Salvador) explained that his delegation s ohH uorte
than such a temporary tolerance and that his amendmeant aws designe t
give recognition to Central American aspirations for unity.
Mr. CHAVEZ (Peru), agreeing with the principle of the m-f-n clause,
and recognizing the ustifiable and clearly defined exceptions of certain
aspb-aragraphs of paragraph 2, explained that he had submitted en
amendment to delete sub-paragraph 2 (c) relating to special preferences
between Cuaba nd the United States because he had not found Justification
for the continued preference either in the Article or in an Annex, or in
the geographic position and present stages of development; these countries
were not aiming at a customs union and had nbt Qeen ravaged by war; and he
thought wi %muld be laudable should these countries not insist on that
Ireference. He also pointed out the difficulty of opposing other more
Justifiable preferences if the present United States-Cuba arrangement
remained in fo.ce,
/Mr.E GURRA (Cuba) E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.5
Page 6
Mr. GUERRA (Cuba) replying to the representative of Peru, stated that
the Annexes to the Draft Charter were designed to simplify the text and
that paragraph 2 (c) did not require a separate Annex.
Paragraph 2 (c) should be viewed in the same light as the other
sub-paragraphs. The basic criteria of an economic nature regarding
exceptions to the m-f-n clause, were the length of time that the preferences
had been established and their specific nature. The United States-Cuban
preference satisfied these conditions and had also been of fundamental
importance in the economic development of Cuba. The exceptions were not
necessarily permanent, and Cuba had entered into negotiations at Geneva
in accordance with Article 16.
Moreover, Article 15 was concerned with new preferences, and amendments
had been offered to Article 16 sanctioning other new preferences; under
those circumstances it would be most difficult to renounce long-standing
preferences so economically important at the present time.
Mr. PEREZ (Dominican Republic) thought the Peruvian amendment
Justified since the preferences in force between the United States and
Cuba were detrimental to other countries in the same economic sphere.
(Mr. GUERRA (Cuba) on a point of order stated that that preference system
was not unilateral.) One of the main objectives of his delegation was to
seek just treatment for his country through the abolition of preferences
which had retarded its economic development. He pointed out that almost all
the islands of the West Indies except his own were part of one preferential
system or another. Should the Peruvian amendment be rejected, his delegation
would ask that such reciprocal preferences be managed in a way least
detrimental to his country and would to that end seek the institution of a
preferential arrangement with the United States similar to that now in force
between Cuba and the United States.
The CHAIRMAN announced that the next meeting would be held -
Saturday, 6 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
The meeting rose at 7.10 p.m. |
GATT Library | vt569fk8282 | Summary Record of the Fifth Meeting Sub-Committee on Administration : Held at Lake Success on 31 January 1947 at 2:45 p.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 1, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 01/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/31 and E/PC/T/C.6/21-36/ADD.1 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/vt569fk8282 | vt569fk8282_90230074.xml | GATT_155 | 1,016 | 6,892 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/31
AND ECONOMIQUE 1 February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THEPREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCEON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIFTH MEETlNG
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATION
Held at Lake Success on 31 January 1947 at 2:45 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. Guillermo Alemilla -
1. Corrections of Previous Summary Records
The South African Delegate requested a correction in the summary
record of the Sub-Committee's first meeting (E/PC/T/C.6/5), on page 3,
third paragraph: It should read " .silmiar to the one of the
United Nations Charter in regard to the Security Council", instead, of
.in regard to the Economic and Social Council".
The Delegate of Brazil requested a correction in the summary record
of the Fourth Meeting (E/PC/T/C.6/25) page- 4, Item 2: according to his
.notes the vote on national income an a criterion was not evenly divided,
but six countries voted against and four for incorporation of national
income as a criterion.
The Delegate of Chile requested a correction on page 3, fourth
paragraph of the Summary Record of the Fourth Meeting (E/PC/T/C.6/25):
It should read: "the same as without any specific provision they are
elected to the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations", instead.
of "...they will always be elected to the Economic and Social Council of
the United Nations".
Upon the motion of the CHAIRMAN the Sub -Committee expresed its
complete satisfaction with the summary records of the Sub-Committee,
notwithstandlng the very minor errors which so far had occurred.
/2. Working Papers E/PC/T/C.6/31
Page 2
2. Working Papers Submitted to the Sub-Committee.
The following working papers were submitted to the Sub-Committee:
A tentative draft of Article 68 submitted as a personal draft of
Mr. Faueto Soto, in his personal capacity, but not in his capacity as
Delegate of Chile.
A Secretariat table of the United Kingdom formula for weighted voting
on the basis of statistical date for 1938.
A tentative redraft by the United Kingdom of paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of
the United States draft for Article 1 as contained in E/PC/T/C.6/w.1.
Mr. Soto explained the ideas underlying his draft of Article 68.
Various questions were put by other delegates, with a view to clarifying
Mr. Soto's proposal.
3. Debate on Article 1 - Purposes.
The Conmittee debated whether the introductory line, preceding
paragraph 1, should attribute the purpose to the InternationalTrade
Organization as in the London draft, or to the World Trade Charter, as in
the United States revision E/PC/T/C.6/W. I. The South African Delegate
proposed to solve this issue by changing line 1 into a clause with the
character of a preamble, and the Sub-Committee unanimously agreed on the-
basis of the wording submitted by the Delegate from South Africa, with a
minor change suggested by the Delegate from Canada to the text set out
below.
Paragraph 1.
The Sub-Committee then debated paragraph1 in the formulation of the
United States Draft as contained in E/PC/T/C.6/W.l. The Australian Delegate
suggested the wording " full and productive employment and high and stable
levels of effective demand and real income" in place of theUnited States
.formulation . The Brazilian Delegate moved for, the elimination of the words
"and for the reduction of tariffs and other trade barriorrs and suggested
the substitution of this negative formulation by a more affirmative one. The
/United States E/PC/T/C. 6/31.
Page 3
United States Delegate pointed out that Article 1 contained a kind of
summary of the whole contents of the 10 Charter, and since some chapters
of the charter dealt with the reductions of tariffs and other trade barriers,
these words ought to be retainied, even as a short formulation of the other
chapters of the Charter were contained in paragraph1. After the Delegates
fom Brazil ansd Australia withdrew their reservations pending further
instructions from their Governments, the Sub-Comnittee unanimously approved
the formulation of paragrapg 1as set out below.
The Sub-Committee approved the wording of paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 as
formulated by the United States (E/PC/T/C.6/W.1.),changing in paragraph 4
the word "promote" to "facilitate",
Pagragha 5 and 6 were approved on the basis of the working paper submitted
by the United Kingdom.
The Sub-Committee resolved unanimously to delete the final two lines
of the United States Draft. The meeting was adjourned to 3 February, at
2.45- p.m. The Sub-Committee unanimously approved the following text:
"Article 1. - General Purposes.
"In pursuance of the determination of the United Nations to create
conditions of economic and social progress essential to world peace,
the signatories of this Charter for world Trade hereby establish an
International Trade Organization through which they will work for the
purposes set out hereunder:
1.. To promote national and intertional action for the expansion
of the production, change and consumption of goods, for the
achievement and maintenance in all countries of high levels of
productive employment, effective demand real income, for the
development of the economic resources of the world, andfor the
reduction of taiffs and other trade barriers andthe elimination
of all forms of discriminatory treatment in international commerce;
thus avoiding excessive in fluctutions i n world trade and
/contributing Page 4
contributing to a balanced and expanding world economy.
2. To other the enjoyment by all Members, on equal termsof
access to the markets, products and productive facilities which
are needed for their economic prosperity and development.
3, To encourage and assist the industrial and general economic
development of Members, particularly of those still in the early
stages of industrial development.
4. To facilitate the solution of problems in the field of
1 . . . **. . ..W
international trade, employment and economic development through
~ V , . .. ,. ; . v , 1'
ccnsultation and. collaboration among Members.
5, To enable Members to avoid recourse to measures which disrupt
wcrld. c==erce, reduce productive employment or retard ;ccncm'c
prorreas by increasing the opportunities for their trade and
economic development on a mutually advantageous basis.
6. To collaborate with other international organizations ii the
activities contemplated by this Charter."
~~~~~~~-''. ..-!',',' r
,.. . .,
'!
u . |
GATT Library | gs770br9048 | Summary Record of the Fifth Plenary Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba., on Friday 28 November 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 28, 1947 | 28/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/SR.5 and E/CONF.2/SR.1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gs770br9048 | gs770br9048_90180130.xml | GATT_155 | 1,679 | 11,275 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED E/CONF.2 /SR.5
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 28 November 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIFTH PLENARY MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba.,
on Friday 28 November 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
President: Mr. Sergio I. CIARK (Cuba)
1. CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS OF GENERAL COMMITTEE
Mr. SUETENS (Belgium) First Vice-President who had presided at the
meeting of the General Committee, explained that the fist meeting of that
Committee was held in order to outline a programme for the termination of the
work of the Conference by 31 December, some of the work to be completed.
earlier, and to clarify a rule of procedure which had already been adopted..
The PRESIDENT announced that the representative of Cuba wished to
correct a misunderstanding: the Cuban Parliament would not meet until the
third week of March.
There being no comment, the report of the General Committee
(E/CONF.2/BUR.2) was approved.
2. CONTINUANCE OF THE GENERAL DISCUSSION
Mr. U. KYIN (Burma) stated that the Draft Charter was of special
significance to his country, which had closely followed its development.
Smaller, under-developed countries had an equal, if not greater interest,
with the larger, developed. countries in the stabilization of International
trade, particularly those countries presently in process of rapid political
development, Countries striving to raise the material standard of living
most needed. stable markets and. stable supplies and therefore looked to the
ITO Charter and were willing to contribute their share to its development.
However, the Charter must be flexible so as to accord the maximum
opportunity for economic development. For instance, full employment must
not alone be the aim; raising to a higher level the present low standards
of employment must, be given equal emphasis.
The Charter should not be negative and restrictive since rigid.
restrictions led to evasions and, conflicts. Rather, it should be flexible
enough to accmodate of philosophies especially as regards
under-developed countries.
Burma was striving for economic rehabilitation as a result of the war;
it was working out a planned economy, which involved industrialization of a
/hitherto agricultural E/CONF.2/SR .5
Page 2
hitherto agricultural country. Agreements between Burma and other nations
must have scope to accomplish this and amendments to the Draft Charter to
be presented by the delegation of Burma would be directed to this end.
The Charter of the ITO would be an instrument of peace if it were
formulated so that those countries not completely industrialized were on
terms of full equality. (For fuller test see Press Release ITO/47).
Mr. WILGRESS (Canada) stated that the alternative to the uniting of
nations to restore multilateral world economy, making national policies
regarding trade subservient to the well-being of all nations, was chaos,
in the form of economic warfare and lowered standards of living. He hoped
that the spirit of goodwill and mutual co-operation evident in the first and
second sessions of the Preparatory Commission would continue to dominate in
the present Conference.
The Draft Charter represented the sustained efforts of careful and
considered work. The countries present at the Preparatory Commissions were
a true cross-section of the world, representing those directly and indirectly
touched by the war, all stages of economic development - from agricultural
to fully matured economies, and those interested in public ownership as well
as those advocating private enterprise. The compromises included in the
results of the work at Geneva took into. consideration all these divergent
interests, It stood to reason that the resultant Draft Charter was a
compromise, not fully acceptable to any one nation, but formulated in a
spirit of co-operation and understanding.
The outstanding example of good faith and sincerity among the countries
represented at Geneva was the conclusion of the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade. The General Agreement had been released 18 November; certain
countries would implement it January first. Herein lay the concrete evidence
of goodwill and the potentialities of the International Trade Organization.
He hoped that the achievements up to now were a preview of future world
trade.
Mr. Wilgress reiterated the statements at Geneva that Canada was in
general prepared to accept compromises even though there were more
qualifications than his delegations would have liked. It was fortunate that
the danger of too broad escape clauses had been recognized, so that
presently there was a Draft Charter which could be generally accepted as a
basis for the International Trade Organization.
He stressed the importance of certain points which had not been fully
studied in Geneva such as voting in the Conference, composition of the
Executive Board and relations with non-Members, although a great deal of
ground work had already been accomplished.
/While the Draft Charter E/CONF.2/SR.5
Page 3
While the Draft Charter represented a finely balanced compromise, two
aspects must be carefully watched: certain changes introduced In Geneva
came close to departing from multilateral agreements; escape clauses must
not nullify the benefits thus far accomplished. For the sake of unanimity,
some points had been left for future resolution, thus placing a great burden
on the Organization. Care must be taken, in order to avoid a break-down
through sheer weight, that these be not beyond the capacity of the-new
organization.
Because of Canada's industrial growth, she watched with particularly
friendly interest the process of industrialization of other countries. The
Draft Charter was encouraging, The results of the present Conference should
be not for-the aggrandizement of individual countries but for the betterment
of the peoples of the world. (For fuller text see Press Release ITO/48).
Mr. AZER (Egypt) stated that the eyes of the world looked toward this
Conference hoping that the Charter would become a pillar of peace. Most
countries would answer that plea by endorsing both the letter and the spirit
of the Charter. The fears of the peoples of the world could be alleviated
by working together, the foremost thought being the interests of the whole,
rather than of the individual. Previous speakers had dwelt upon Fconomic
chaos and the suffering of mankind. The outcome of this Conference would.
have an enormous bearing on the future: the return of free trade was not
yet in sight; the problems of the large and small countries should be worked
out in a spirit of co-operation, particularly during the transition period,
of the economic and political development of smaller countries.
Egypt, always an agricultural country, dependent primarily upon its
export of cotton, had had to industrialize to care for its increased
population. The war had accelerated this process and she now found hereol
with an urban skilled-labour class. The rise in the standard of living
was one of the aims of the Charter of the United Nations. Such a development
resulted In increased purchasing power, increasing the flow of both domestic
and foreign goods.
Small, under-developed countries looked to the more industrialized
countries for understanding. Fortunately, some of these had a realistic
attitude.,
The delegation of Egypt would present at the proper time some
suggested revisions. There were two points to be considered: prior to the
Initiation of the Draft. Charter of the ITO, the Arab states had passed
resolutions to safeguard their common interests. Those were binding and
would be honoured. Also, should the Charter tolerate preferential treatment,
the Arab League should be free to enter into similar agreements.,
/Special privileges S/CONF.2/SR.5
Page 4
Special privileges were damaging to. the smooth functioning and national
interests of other states. Smaller countries realized the responsibilities
and obligations of the larger powers, but they were a natural outcome of
their unique position. Inevitably all natitons must come closer together,
since all nations were becoming more economically inter-dependent
Mr. Azar pleaded for mutual understanding: not "survival of the
fittest", but "live and. let live". (For fuller text see Press Release ITO/61)
Mr. VALIES (El Salvador) emphasized that his country would contribute
to the spirit of co-operation of the Conference, in the hope that progress
would be made for the great and small, for industrial and agricultural
countries. Had El Salvador been represented at the Preparatory Commissions
it might have advocated the principle of international trade based on
economic regions rather than. political; that idea might yet serve as a
compromise solution to many problems. An organization concerned with the
commercial interchange of nations would Implement. the aims, of Bretton Woods:
the Charter of the ITO would. fulfil those aims if marked. emphasis on
restrictions gave way to the sponsoring of international development,.
El Salvador's problems were the development of hydroelectric power,
the development of industrial sponsored by local investment, and markets
for the products of such industries. Such problems could. be. solved. by the
Charter if more international co-operation than presently foreseen were
permitted.- It was therefore necessary to submit amendents to Chapter III
and Chapter VII.. The financial resources of the Organization should be
utilized to aid economic development. Inasmuch as the purchasing power of
non-industrial countries scarcely covered, basic needs, it was not possible
to achieve the aims. of the Charter, even were there no barriers or tariffs,
without economic development. The reduction of prices, the elimination of
tariffs would not solve the problem. Concerning the Chapter on commercial
policy and the general treatment of most favoured nations, the delegation
of EL Salvador would ask for the inclusion of a "Central American clause"
permitting preferential arrangements between Central American countries.
Also, since El Salvador's tariffs were purely financial their reduction
or elimination would depend upon industrialization of that country .
Mr.. VALIES recognized that the Charter was not silent on that subject
but. felt that economic development should be brought into proper.
perspective with trade barriers and. restrictions. (For fuller text see.
Press Release ITO/60). -.
/ Nr. GANI (Indonesian E/CONF.2/SR.5
Page 5
Mr. GANI (Indonesian Republic) (The official record of the speech will
be issued separately.)
Mr. SPEEKENBRINK (Netherlands), on a point of order, took exception to
the propriety of certain parts of the speech of the Indonesian representative
and asked the Chair for a ruling.
The PRESIDENT announced that he would make the ruling at the beginning
of the next meeting.
The meeting rose at 12.10 p.m. |
|
GATT Library | rb413zk4435 | Summary Record of the First Meeting : Held at Lake Success on 20 January 1945 at 3:00 p.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, January 21, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Committee of the International Conference on Trade and Employment, and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 21/01/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/4 and E/PC/T/C.6/1-20 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/rb413zk4435 | rb413zk4435_90230027.xml | GATT_155 | 1,139 | 7,190 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/4
AND ECONOMIQUE 21 January 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE
ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
DRAFTING COMMITTEE
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST MEETING
Held at Lake Success on 20 January 1945
at. 3:00 p.m.
The meeting, was opened by Mr. A. D. K. Owen, Acting Secretary-
General.
It was agreed that the rules of procedure of the Prearatory
Committee should apply as far as possibe to the proceedings of the Drafting
Committee. It was also agreed that the provisions of Rule 57 of these
rules should be waived so that the Chairman-and Vice-Chairman might be
able to participate in meetings both as such and as the representative
of a member, and that Rule 49 should be waived, the making of verbatim
records being unnecessary.
Mr. COLBAN (NORWAY) was unanimously elected Chairman of the
Drafting, Committee and Mr. ADARKAR (INDIA) Vice-Chairman. The
provisional agenda was adopted without change.
Mr. PARANGUA (BRAZIL) stated that agreement had been reached in
London upon sixty-six of the articles confined in the Charter which had
been-drafted there. Agreement had still to be reached on the
remaining twenty-three articles. Of these twenty-three articles
agreement had been reached upon one paragraph of one article, five
articles had been completely drafted, two articles contained provisions
which were to remain only if their subject matter had not been fully
covered elsewhere, one article was drafted with four alternative
wordings and fourteen articles were to be considered and drafted at a
/later E/PC/T/C.6/4
Page 2
later stage. He suggested that the Drafting Committee should set up two
sub-committees the first of which should examine from the drafting standpoint
the articles which had been agreed upon in London and the second of which
should work upon the remaining articles. He asked what was the meaning
of the phrase "at a later stage" which was used throughout the report with
reference to the latter articles. Did this phrase mean that these articles
would be considered by the Drafting Committee or by the Second Session of
the Preparatory Committee. Finally he pointed out that the Report of the
First Session of the Preparatory Committee expressed the doubt whether
the Drafting Committee could do further work upon Article 68 which dealt
with membership of the Executive Board.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) replied that the meaning of the phrase
"at a later stage" depended upon the article to which it referred. For
example, he did not think the Drafting Committee could deal with the
article regulation relations with non-members; but it certainly, could
work upon Articles 15 to 23 inclusive. He suggested that no rigid limits
should be laid down at the present time with regard to the scope of the
Drafting Committee's work, but that these limits should be determined in
the course of proceedings by the dictates of common sense.
The CHAIRMAN expressed the opinion that the Brazilian delegate's
proposal might result in loss of time. He suggested that the Drafting
Committee should set up two sub-committees, the first to deal with
Articles 15 to 23 inclusive and the second to deal with functions of
commissions, the purposes of the organization membership of the Executive
Board and voting.
In the light of the Chairman's observations Mr. PARANAGUA agreed to
postpone consideration of his proposol.
Mr. SMITH (CANADA) said that he thought the Drafting Committee
/should E/PC/T/C.6/4
Page 3
should discuss the issues, which the Chairman suggested should be
referred to sub-committees, before any subsidiary bodies were set up
to consider them.
The SECRETARY explained that a great amount of detailed work
had been done upon Articles 15 to 23 in London and for that reason it
would seem that a sub-committee could be set up immediately to work
upon these articles. In view of the Secretary's explanation Mr. SMITH
withdrew his proposal.
It was agreed that in accordance with the Chairman's proposal
two sub-committees should be set up immediately. The first of these
sub-committees would deal with Articles 15 to 23 inclusive and would
be composed of the delegates for the UNITED STATES, FRANCE, the UNITED
KINGDOM, the NETHERLANDS, BELGIUM, AUSTRALIA and CZECHOSLOVAKIA, while
the second sub-committee should deal with membership of the Executive
Board, and voting and should be composed of the delegates for BELGIUM,
the NETHERLANDS, BRAZIL, CUBA, SOUTH AFRICA, the UNITED KINGDOM and
the UNITE STATES. It was also agreed that the Chairmen of the
sub-committees could call upon any delegate who was not a member of
the sub-committees to participate at any time and also that any delegate,
even if not called upon by the Chairman of one of the sub-committees,
.could be present and participte in the meetings of the sub-committee
whenever he wished.
The CHAIRMAN asked the Drafting Committee whether it wished to
have a general exchange of views upon the work to be done and if
so whether it wished that this exchange should take place immediately
or at a later date.
Mr. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM) said that he thought if a general
discussion of the Charter were held, it should be conducted chapter by
chapter so that after each chapter had been examined the Drafting
Committee could decide whether it was necessary to set up a subsidiary
/body E/PC/T/C.6/4
Page 4
body to do further work upon that part of the Charter. He thought that to
appoint a general rapporteur for the Drafting Committee would burden unduly
any delegate and he therefore suggested that instead of a general rapporteur
a legal and dafting sub-committee should be established at an early stage
to do drafting and editing work upon each chapter as the general discussion
upon it was finished.
The CHAIRMAN agreed with Mr. Shackle, but stated that he thought it
was too early to appoint a drafting sub-committee at this stage
Mr. JUSSIANT (BELGIUM-LUXEI-BOURG) asked that when the drafting
sub-committee was set up it should revise the French text of the Charter
as well as the English text. This was agreed.
Mr. FRESQUET (CUBA) asked whether the report of the Drafting Committee
would be published. It was agreed that at the present time no decision
should be taken on this point, but that the report, for the present, should.
be drafted so that, if necessary, it would be in such a form that it could
be made public.
The SECRETARY announced that as Syria was linked with the Lebanon in
a customs union, the Secretary-General was taking steps to invite Syria to
participate in the work of the Drafting Committee in planning the tariff
negotiations to commence in Geneva on 8 Aprl.
It was decided. that the Drafting Committee should hold its next
meeting at 10:15 a.m. on Tuesday, 21 January 1947 and that the two
sub-committees which had been established should meet at 2:45 p.m. on the
same date. |
GATT Library | td123xs4169 | Summary Record of the First Meeting : Held at Lake Success on 5 February 1947, at 12:15 p.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 5, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 05/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/42 and E/PC/T/C.6/37-55 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/td123xs4169 | td123xs4169_90230091.xml | GATT_155 | 442 | 2,980 | United Nations
Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC /T/C.6/42
AND ECONOMIQUE 5 February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST MEETING
Held at Lake Success on 5 February 1947, at 12:15 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. B. N. ADARKAR, M.B.E.
On the suggestion of its Chairman, Mr. v;1=7, the Drafting
Committee constituted itself as SUB-COMMITTEE ON TARIFF NEGOTIATIONS.
Mr. LEDDY. (United States) proposed the election of Mr. B. N. ADARKAR
(India) as chairman: the proposal was seconded by several Delegates.
Mr. ADARKAR was unanimously elected.
The CRAIRMAN suggested, and the Sub-Committee approved, that
Summary Records of the Meetings should be kept and put at the disposal
of the Delegations, It will be the first task of the Sub-Committee to
select such Articles of the Charter which should be embodied in the
General Agreement on Tariffs end Trade. The language of these Articles
will be revised with the view of incorporating them in the, General
Agreement. The Sub-Coimmittee will recommand further suitable provisions
with regard to the period of duration, the putting into force and
termination of the General Agreement and some other legal and technical
provisions.
Mr. LEDDY (United States) suggested that an lnterim International
Body should be set up to ensure the working of the General Agreement
before the Charter comes into force, and called attention to the
"Draft Clauses for the Interim Agreement" circulated by the United
Kingdom Delegation (document C.6/W.40). He also informed the Chairman
/that the United States E/PC/T/C .6/42
that the United States Delegation was preparing a draft of Articles of the
Charter to be embodied in Article 1 of GeneraL Agreement.
The Sub-Committee considared the "TENTATIVE AND PARTIAL DRAFT
OUTLlNE OF GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE" as suggested by the
First Session of the Preparatory Committee in Annexure 10 of its
Report (page 51, section K).
THE PREMBLE was considered adequate, but the Sub-Committee may wish to
reconsider it at a later stage.
Mr. LEDDY suggested that the adopted text, of the Articles of the
Charter should be made part of this Article.
The Sub-Committee discussed the question how the GeneraL Agreement
will be put into operation by the countries.
It was understood that the General Agreement will be subject to the
appropriate ratiffication by legislative bodies of the contracting
parties.
The Sub-Committee decided that Article 14 of the Charter should
form a part of Article I of the General Agreement, and that Articles
15-23 of the Charter will be considered after the Technical Sub-Committee
has presented its report on them.
Next meeting: tomarrow at 2:45 p.m. |
GATT Library | mf844yr2109 | Summary Record of the First Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 26 November 1947, at 10.4.5. am | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 26, 1947 | Second Committee: Economic Development | 26/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.1 and E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.1-17 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/mf844yr2109 | mf844yr2109_90180435.xml | GATT_155 | 83 | 605 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.1
DU 26 November 1947
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND COMMITTEE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PzT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 26 November4 197, at 10.4.5. am
The Committeee mt at 10.45 a.m. under the acting Chairmanship of the
sidPreent of the Conference, (Mr. Sergio I. Clark)
MRamr. ón BetetMaa c(xio) was unanimously elected Chairman of the
Committee.
The Committee adjourned at 10.50 a.m. |
GATT Library | gt990sk0303 | Summary Record of the First Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 26 November 1947, at 4.30 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 27, 1947 | General Committee | 27/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/BUR/SR.1 and E/CONF.2/BUR/SR.1-12 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gt990sk0303 | gt990sk0303_90180207.xml | GATT_155 | 999 | 6,643 | UNRESTRICTED
United Nations Nations Unies E/CONF.2/BUR/SR.1
27 November 1947
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
GENERAL COMMITTEE
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 26 November 1947, at 4.30 p.m.
Acting Chairman: Mr. Max SUETENS (Balgium)
1. CONSIDERATION OF RULE 54 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE.
The CHAIRMAN referred to Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure proposed by
the Delegation of Chile (E/CONF.2/2/Rev.3) and adopted by the Confererce.
Mr. WILGRESS (Canada) proposed the following resolution and instruction
to Committee Chairmen which he suggested might meet the wishes of the
Delegation of Chile more appropriately than by incorporating these points
in the Rules of Procedure:
(It was pointed out that under Rule 57 the Rules of Procedure could be
amended by Conference decision on the General Committee's recommendation).
"Resolution' of the the General Committee
The General Committee resolves and recommends to the Conference
that all formal proposals, apart from those arising out of and in the
course of discussion at the Conference, to amend the Draft Charter
should be submitted in writing to the Executive Secretary not later than
Saturday, 6 December.
Instruction by the General Committee to the Chairmen of all Committees
and Sub-CommissionC
1. Meietins of Committees and Sub-Committees should be so arranged as
to enable those members of them which have expressed a written desire to
do so to participate in their proceedings.
2. As all representatives have the right to re-open discussion-in the
plenary Conference of any proposal for amendments to the Draft Charter
rejected by a committee or sub-committee, the reports of these bodies
should contain a record of discussion of all such proposals, including
the results of any votes taken."
In reply to a point raised by Mr. NASH (New Zealand), Mr. WLIGRESS (Canada
made a distinction between formal proposals, which it should be possible for
Delegations to submit by 6 December,and consequential amendments arising out
of discussions in Committee.
/After considerable E/CONF.2/BUR/SR.1
Page 2
After considerable discussion, it was generally agreed that although a
member could move an amendmet,.- at a later stage, Delegations should submit
formal proposals by 6 December.
The Resolution proposed by Mr. Wilgress was adopted.
The Committee began consideration of the draft instruction to
Committee Chairman proposed by Mr. WILGRESS (Canada).
Mr. COLBAN (Norway) questioned the necessity of paragra.ph1 on the
grounds that it might be misused.
Mr. HOLMES (United Kingdom) doubted that it would be possible to
anticipate whether one wished to speak or certain subjects, since points
raised in Committee would have a bearing on this wetter.
Mr. HAKIM (Lebanon.) and Mr. BETETA (Mexico) explained what they -
believed the Delegation of Chile had had in wind in proposing the inclusion
in the Rules of this point, i.e., that some Delegations not previously
having had the opportunity, whether because they were small or because they
were not members of the Sub-Committee, might wish to participate in the
discussion of certain questions.
Mr. PHILIP (France) doubted the wisdom of re-opening debates,
particularly because of the time factor.
Mr. NASH (New Zealand) Puggested the following alternative'wording:
"Chairmen of Committees and Sub-Committees shall arrange the
control of meetings in such a manner as to give the maximum opportunity
to all Delegates. to express their views and in particular those
Delegates who advise the Chairman in writing of their desire to be
heard on a particular subject.
"Results of discussion and eventual voting on proposals or
amendments to the Charter in Committee and Sub-Committee shall,
when reported to Main Coomittees or Plenary Sessions, mention accepted
and rejected proposals or amendments.
"Any member may re-open debate in plenary meetings on proposals
or amendments rejected by committees and sub-committees." -
The CHAIRMAN made the following suggestion:
"Delegations which are not members of a sub-committee shall
have the right by giving notice in writing to the Chairmen to submit
proposals on any question before the sub-committee in which they are
interested and to participate in the discussion of such proposal."
To discuss these proposals with the Delegation of Chile the CHAIRMAN
appointed the -following members, who would report beck to the General
Committee: -
Mr. Philip (France)
Mr- Hakim. (Lebanon)
Mr. Beteta (Mexico)
Mr. Nash (New Zealand)
2. COMMENCEMENT Page 3
2. COMMENCEMENT AND TERMINATION DATE FOR WORK OF PRINCIPAL COMMTTEES.
It was agreed to have at least one principal committee meeting
simultaneously with each plenary meeting during the remainder of the
present week.
The Committee agreed that beginning Monday, 1 December, two principal
committees would meet simultaneously as follows:
Committees I and VI
Committees II and V
Committees III and TV
It was agreed however, that this should be a flexible arrangement in
order to permit additional simultaneous meetings of principal committees
when necessary, especially in the latter weeks of the Conference, on the
recommendation of the General Committee.
It was agreed that the customary work week would be six days, meetings
would be scheduled on Sundays only when necessary, which might be the case
particularly during the latter part of the Conference, and that 25 December
would be considered a holiday for the entire Conference.
It was agreed that a target date of 20 December be established for the
termination of the work of Committees I, IV and V and 31 December for
Committees II, III and VI.
3. CONFERENCE HOURS AND HOSPITALITY
It was agreed that conference sessions would commence at 10.30 a.m.,
and 4.00 p.m., the rising of the Committee to be within the discretion of
the Chairman. Chairmen were urged to convene their Committees promptly at
the appointed time.
The Committee expressed the hope that in the interests of the work of
the Conference, official entertainment would be kept to a minimum, end that
no receptions held would be scheduled prior to nine o'clock, in view of
the working hours of the Conference.
Mr. ALAMILLA (Cuba) agreed to take up with the competent authorities
the problem of noise near the Capitol.
The meeting rose at 6.35 p.m. |
GATT Library | kg834nt1326 | Summary Record of the First Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Wednesday, 26 November 1947, at 10.45 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 26, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 26/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/kg834nt1326 | kg834nt1326_90190214.xml | GATT_155 | 85 | 592 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
UNRESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.1
26 November 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE
GENERAL COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Wednesday, 26 November 1947, at 10.45 a.m.
The Committee met at 10.45 a.m. under the acting Chairmanship of the
President of the Conference, (Mr. Sergio I. Clark).
The Honourable L. D. Wilgress (Canada) was unanimously elected Chairman
of the Committee.
The Committee adjourned at 10.50 a.m. |
GATT Library | zx428gt4125 | Summary Record of the First Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Wednesday, 26 November 1947, at 10.45 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 26, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 26/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/SR.1 and E/CONF.2/C.4/SR.1-15 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zx428gt4125 | zx428gt4125_90190670.xml | GATT_155 | 0 | 0 | |
GATT Library | jk033cm2904 | Summary Record of the First Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Wednesday, 26 November 1947, at 10.45 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 26, 1947 | Fourth Committee: Restrictive Business Practices | 26/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.4/SR.1 and E/CONF.2/C.4/SR.1-15 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/jk033cm2904 | jk033cm2904_90190670.xml | GATT_155 | 75 | 586 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
UNRESTRICTED E/CONF.2/C. 4/SR.1
26 November 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH. S}
TH COMMMITTEEUT %
TCTIIVE BUSINESSPRAC IVMAIS BM PRCI
FIRST MEESUNGIRREETNG REC=MTH
HelHavena, Cuaatetehe capitol, Cub, Wdnesday, 26 Novem.er 1947, at 10.45 a.m
Tat he. 4 un tunderithe 1ting Cha0,4ansh5r hc te acansbaie
Pe s$t of ntereeCeeobMfMrSec(r .IIrglaiZ. Cr).
Charlone (D:guCyrawas unaasniosuy urelected Chammaai of he Committeet co
CoOimmtees ajorneu Ua.dt10.50 a.mz. |
GATT Library | cw930pb4545 | Summary Record of the First Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havans, Cuba, on Wednesday, 26 November 1947, at 10:45 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 26, 1947 | First Committee: Employment and Economic Activity | 26/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.1/SR.1, E/CONF.2/C.1/C/1-4, and C.1/SR.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/cw930pb4545 | cw930pb4545_90180270.xml | GATT_155 | 87 | 598 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
UNRESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.1/SR.l .
26 November 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FIRST COMMITTEE
EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST MEETING
Hold at the Capitol, Havans, Cuba, on Wednesday, 26 November 1947, at 10:45 a.m.
The Committee met at 10:45 a.m. under the acting Chairmanship of the
President of the Conference, (Mr. Sergio I. Clark).
The Honourable J. J. Dedman (Australia) was unanimously elected.
of the Committee.
The Committee adjourned at 10:50 a.m. |
GATT Library | qs148ms5369 | Summary Record of the First Plenary Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Friday, 21 November 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, November 22, 1947 | 22/11/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/SR.1 and E/CONF.2/SR.1-21 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/qs148ms5369 | qs148ms5369_90180124.xml | GATT_155 | 8,369 | 52,745 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE UNRESTRICTED
ON DU E/CONF.2/SR.1
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 22 November 1947
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST PLENARY MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba,
on Friday, 21 November 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
1. ADDRESS BY HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CUBA
HisExcellency Dr. GRAU SAN MARTIN (President of Cuba) said that his
country deemed it a great honour and privilege to which he added his
personal satisfaction, to have been afforded the opportunity of most
cordially welcoming the distinguished plenipotentiaries who were meeting at
the crossroads of the World for the purpose of carrying out one of the most
important duties of historical responsibility that the human conscience, in
its anxiety to create new instruments capable of securing the peace and
happiness of men, had ever undertaken.
The people of Cuba and its Government, over which he had the honour
of presiding, felt highly flattered by the fact that under their hospitable
skies an assembly of such significant importance should be held, in
accordance with the resolutions of the United Nations organization imbued
with the noble effort of propitiating the economic stability of the world,
by helping to point out a way at a time when all was so uncertain.
Trade had been man's main peacetime activity almost since the time
he had begun to live in society, which led people to believe that the
success to be attained by the work of the Conference would become an
invaluable pillar of that lasting peace that all the peoples were so
anxiously seeking. The specific purposes of the present momentous meeting
were therefore closely interwoven with that noble aspiration which all held
that the unanimous desire for a just and permanent peace should become a
tangible reality.
The solution of the serious social problem of employment depended to a
great measure on the more or less propitious conditions under which trade
would be carried on in the future. That was one of the main aspects which
would undoubtedly be the preoccupation of the plenipotentiaries' meeting
in Havana , as it was to those who had the opportunity of co-operating in the
work of preparation of the International Trade Charter at the preliminary
meetings, which would now be the subject of the intelligent consideration
of members of the conference.
/Commercial interchange E/CONF.2/SR.1
Page 2
Commercial interchange had reached such a degree of development that
it had gone way beyond the period when it merely endeavoured to satisfy the
material needs of mankind. It could now be said that trade, besides being
the last link in the chain of production and distribution of wares and in
the access of the people to prosperity - which would be greater as its
development increased - also satisfied desires of a moral order. They were
no longer dealing with that primitive relation of material interest since
the present concept of trade took in such a vast sphere that there was room
in it for all the initiatives of human thought and energy.
Dr . Grau San Martin added that the representatives had before them the
grave responsibility of creating, in a world thrown out of balance by the
war, conditions of prosperity for all. He was aware that they were prepared
by the high quality of their minds as well as by the sound orders that they
had received from their Governments, fully to undertake that commitment,
which gave all the assurance that they would overcome such obstacles as
might stand in the way of the successful achievement of their undertaking.
The task of all representatives was closely linked to the very task of
peace. It was well to remember that trade, as an immediate object in the
interest of -man, had been frequently referred to as the cause of disturbance
of good relations among peoples. Illustrious thinkers had repeatedly
proclaimed that wars were nothing save concrete manifeetations and fatal
consequences of a lack of balance that had come about in economic interchange.
But those who believed in that philosophic interpretation of conflicts might
easily be proved wrong if a system of international trade could be agreed
upon which, through its fairness and soundness, might be capable of removing
the spectre of war.
It had been Cuba' s privilege to participate in the work preparatory to
the present meeting and to have belonged to what was called the "Nuclear
Group" which had charge of preparing the Draft World Trade Charter.
Representatives at previous meetings had had the satisfaction of bringing up
the points that were deemed adequate to promote the lawful growth of world
trade.
They were then encouraged by the same faith that moved them in the
present task. But the hopes they had placed on the objectives of the
Conference were still broader, because they involved the ambition that the
new standards would serve not only for the immediate purpose of destroying
barriers which hindered the normal functions of commercial interchange, but
because it was believed that those general rules would be followed by an
improvement in the standard of living of countries that were still retarded
/in their material E/CONF.2/SR.1
Page 3
in their material development.
Everyone was well aware that the preoccupations of the representatives
were entirely unselfish and that they were seeking with altruistic and
constructive vision to have the present meeting reach agreements that would
raise the standard of living of many countries. Those of the representatives
who had the good fortune of representing nations which enjoyed a high
standard of technical and industrial progress should endeavour, without
failing further to improve that beneficial evolution, to have all nations
succeed in turn in achieving a degree of progress and culture which would
make it possible for them to fulfil the objectives that seemed essential
to every society- that was economically well organized: the prosperity
and happiness of man and his dignified position in production and in life.
It should be everyone's maximum desire not only to attain the position of
those countries which had achieved a high degree of industrial development,
but also to raise the standard of living of other peoples.
The world today was anxious for a new order in production and trade,
a better distribution of materials and products. Insofar as it might be
possible for all represented at the conference an endeavour should be made
to prevent man from going against the work of Nature, and on the contrary,
an endeavour should be made to have him follow the routes of Providence
which represented in the last analysis, the soundest essentials, because,
otherwise, they would run the risk of contradicting the natural right
inherent in all peoples to produce and participate in the commercial
interchange with those products which could be produced in the easiest
and most spontaneous manner.
The view of the Cuban Government regarding the present problems of
the world among which were those submitted to the consideration of
representatives, naturally included formulae of a technical order capable
of giving sound guidance to economic relations; but it was mainly
characterized by the spiritual encouragement that gave it shape and
stimulation. They believed that if the economic standard was to be an
effective guarantee of the rights it covered, it must be Inspired in a
deep sentiment of human justice and in a respect for democratic principles.
The activities of the Conference would be of little use if they were limited
to an erection of structures of faultless scientific appearance, but which,
in the end, did not seek to meet the legitimate rights and the demands that
were honestly founded.
They were seeking an intelligent co-ordination of their different
possibilities, from which it could be assumed that they had reached the
necessary understanding that personal interest was secured in the measure
/in which they E/CONF.2/SR.1
Page 4
in which they understood the interests of others, without losing sight of
the fact that such harmonious adjustment should be developed in a democratic
atmosphere, such as was offered by the high moral keynote of the present
meeting.
One of the most fruitful .nd profitable tasks of the Conference would.
be that which attempted to prevent fear and suspicion from obstructing the
free development of peoples and thus delay their material improvement. On
that they based their fervent hope which they entrusted to the wisdom of the
Conference in order to succeed in creating a system which would destroy
every threat to the peaceful and honest exercise of commercial activities
and which, in that way, would solemnly consecrate, as the golden rule of
world economy, the just principle of security in productive activities.
The broadmindedness which inspired the present meeting gave the feeling
that it would not be indifferent to the needs of those nations with incipient
economies, which, like many American nations, required financial co-operation
for their industrialization as a meant of effectively strengthening that
bastion of freedom which it was sought to make impregnable, for the defence
and protection of the most cherished of human ideals.
Dr. Grau San Martin called the attention of the assembly to the fact-
that the signing of the International Trade Charter in Havana - bulwark of
the West Indies - which was the last foothold of a past which today.
disappeared in. order. to make way for further human conquests, was an
unmistakable sympton that America, in a tireless struggle for Freedom and
Justice, looked with honourable complacency upon the consecration of supreme
aspirations that had been its own from the very start of its venturesome
existence.
Economy had become the very life of the world. The presence of
representatives at the Conference was a denial of the erroneous concept that
gave but minor importance to the great problem of trade. On the contrary
the feeling of the present times demanded that those activities should be
given greater Importance, placing them on the highest plane of human purposes
and moral nature. They must meet the material demands of existence and
unhesitatingly heed the voice of necessity, but they must do so with the
highest ethical standards and the most worthy incentive. The subtle gears of
economy should be improved without losing sight of the fact that it would reach
its highest degree of perfection the more closely they played. it in the service
of Peace, binding it closely to the triumph of justice and freedom.
In wishing representatives a pleasant stay in his country,
Dr. Grau San Martin hoped that their very important work would be highly
successful. He was fully confident that such generous efforts could result
only in fruitful achievement for the present and a rich endowment for
future generations.
/2. MESSAGE E/CONF.2/SR .1
Page 5
2. MESSAGE ON BEHALF OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS BY
MR. BENJAMIN COHEN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY-GENERAL
Mr. Benjamin COHEN (Assistant Secretary-General in charge of the
Department of Public Information of the United. Nations) stated that he
desired to convey to His Excellency the President, as well as to their
Excellencies the President of the Legislative Chambers and Cabinet Members,
the sincere appreciation of the United Nations for the great honour
Conferred by their attendance at the inaugural meeting.
The Secretary-General, Mr. Trygve Lie, prevented by the unexpected
extention of the work of the General Assembly, of personally attending the
present Conference under the auspices of the United nations, which he
considered of the most far reaching importance, had asked. Mr. Cohen to
represent him and to convey his deep regrets at not being able to come
to Havana as he had wished to do.
The Secretary-General had also requested Mr. Cohen to transmit his
sincere thanks to the Government of Cuba, (without whose co-operation it
would not have been possible to convene the Conference in the beautiful
city of havana), together with his high appreciation of the excellent
work which the Commission, appointed by the Cuban Foreign Office, has
done in preparing the Conference as well as of the cordial hospitality now
being tendered by the people and authorities of the Cuban Republic.
In few fields of the vast task outlined by the San Francisco Charter
could the United Nations make a more immediate contribution to the
improvement of international relations and of the economic life of the
various peoples than in that of international trade. Article 55 of the
Charter provided that the United Nations, in order to further peaceful
and friendly relations among nations shall promote the establishment of
high standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and
social progress and development. At its very first session in 1946, the
Economic and Social Council had established a Preparatory Committee for the
International Conference on Trade and Employment, which met first in London
and then in Geneva and whose endeavours had attained the most complete
success. It had now called together this Conference to study the draft
Charter prepared by that Committee, looking towards the establishment of an
international trade Organization.
The years following the first world war had seen the development of
a rapid and ominous trend towards national economic isolationism, and in
favour of constantly higher barriers to international trade. Positive
efforts were made through the League of Nations to arrest that trend by
international action. The World Economic Conference of 1927, the Tariff
Trade Conference of 1930 and 1931, the International Monetary and Economic
/Conference E/CONF .2/SR .1
Page 6
Conference of 1933 bore witness to those efforts and to the failure with
which they were attended.
The end of the recent world war provided a better opportunity to
carry on the work. It was seized by the United nations and a new approach
to the problem was adopted with results both immnsely gratifying and
encouraging. The present draft Charter reflected that new approach; and
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trude recently concluded in Geneva -
an agreement unprecedented in its technique as well as in its scope -
pointed to what might be accomplished in that field.
The Conference was meeting at a time when the economy of the world
was tragically disrupted by the effects of a war of unparalleled
destructiveness. It could not be expected to deviso solutions for all the
ensuing maladjustments, many of the most urgent of which were being
attacked elsewhere, through the economic organs of the United Nations,
the Specialized Agencies, and by the governments directly concerned.
Its task was to look beyond such immediate distortions and to chart
a course for what it was hoped would be a brighter future, and to establish
a code of conduct which nations would accept as a guide for their commercial
policies in a United effort to make the best use of the world's resources
for the common welfare. Representatives were being asked to make a solomn
pledge to direct the efforts of their countries to the pursuit by
international co-operation of rising standards of employment, production
and consumption.
It was not possible to underestimate the difficulties of the task!
The immediate distortions and stresses of the world were not of direct
concern. But they were so acute that they would be an ever-present factor
in the discussions and must be taken into account in the drafting of the
measures for bringing the ITO Charter into effect. The great contribution
in that field was to ensure that the measures boing forced upon governments
in periods of abnormal economic stress like the present should not become
a permanent feature of the peace economy. The world had had ono bitter costly
lesson of what that meant. The Conference and the effect thereafter given
to its decisions would show whether that lesson had been learnt.
The document which the Conference would prepare must be so drafted as
to fit the needs of a great diversity of states with wido variety of economic
and political circumstances and in different stages of economic development.
It was hore that the Report of the Preparatory Committee gave causo for
optimism. The diverse conditions existing in the many countries present were
reflected in the composition of the Preparatory Committee itself. Its
members were deliberately chosen by the Economic and Social Council to
/include E /CONF.2/SR.1
Page 7
include a variety of geographical areas, a variety of types of economy, and
a variety of political and economic philosophies. Thus the main issues
which confronted the Conference had been submitted to a most exhaustive
debate resulting in the draft before the Conference. There was every
reason to hope that broad areas of agreement could be found in the
Conference.
The world was weary, perplexed and still haunted by fear. The
Conference could send forth a message which would revive lagging spirits
and bring fresh hope.
Mr. Cohen, on behalf of the Secretary-General, wished the fullest
measure of successful achievement in the important work of the Conference.
His Excellency Gonzalez Munoz, Minister of State, took the Chair
as Temporary Chairman. E/CONF. 2/SR.1
Page 8
3. ADDRESS BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND
Mr. GUTT (Chairman of the International monetary Fund), said that since
the beginning of its activities, ITO had been good enough to invite the
International Monetary Fund to participate in its work. He wished to express
his thanks for that consideration. More important, the representatives'
concern was to see that the International Trade Organization worked in close
collaboration with the Fund was evidence of the thoroughness with which they
were approaching the problem of a balanced expansion of international trade.
That was the problem for which the Fund and the ITO, each in its field,
must strive together to find a solution.
At Bretton Woods, representatives of forty-four countries expressed
the opinion that an international trade organization would be needed if the
nations of the world were to be successful in clearing the channels of trade
of the obstacles which hampered nations in their efforts to attain higher
standards of living and economic progress. For that reason they adopted
Resolution VII of the Bretton Woods Conference urging the nations of the
world "to reach agreement as soon as possible on ways and means whereby
they may beet reduce obstacles to international trade and in other ways
promote mutually advantageous international commercial relations". That was
what members of the Conference were trying to do.
In some respect athe problems they dealt with were similar to those
dealt with by then Fund. After all, unecessary quantitative restrictions
and unecessary exchange controls had precisely the saws effect in
restricting trade. And competitive exchage depreciation was in itself
another fo: of tariff on simports and subsidy on exports.
Therefore, according to whether or not the International Trade
Organization and the International Monetary Fund acted in good understanding
together, they would be of mutual help to each other, or they would be in
conflict .with each other It wont without saying that the first alternative
was not only desisnablerable but indis The International Trade
Organization alone wouId not be able to settle the economic problems of the
world; nor would the International Monetary Fund alone; nor the International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development alone. There must be a common
understanding, an overall view. It had always been necessary; it was still
more so today than at the time the work of the representatives began. The
world situation had deteriorated from the political point of view -and that,
early always reacted on the economic situation - because many hopes which
were, rightly or wrongly, entertained, had not been fulfilled. It had
deteriorated from the economic point of view because cirumstances had by
themselves been unfavourable - bad crops, shortages of raw material and
/fuel E/CONF.2/SR .1
Page 9
fuel - and because of trade and payments difficulties.
That was an additional reason why a great, a very great combined effort
of all international organizations - each acting in its proper field - would
be necessary to help the world economy to rise and move forward again.
he had spoken of trade and payments difficulties which hampered progress
in world recovery. Here, especially the IMF and the ITO both working towards
the balanced expansion of world trade, the first in the monetary field, the
second in the commercial field, could do much to see that trade and payments
difficulties were not increased by harmful restrictive measures.
Whatever form such harmful restrictions might take, whether through
exchange policy or commercial policy, their common purpose was to avoid such
obstacles to the expansion of world trade and the establishment of a healthy
balance in international payments. Close co-operation between the trading
countries, as well as between the two organizations, would be necessary if
that effort was to be successful.
The Fund wished to act on that premise. They believed it to be most
essential that the two organizations should understand one another so that
they might most effectively work together. Even in a rapidly recovering
world that would have been necessary. Under present conditions, when so
many countries were facing a critical international payments problem, it was
indispensable that the economic problems which all faced should be tackled
boldly and with good will, by the countries themselves and by all
international organizations. Otherwise, there was great danger that that
crisis would generate into a series of restrictive measures that would hamper
world recovery and the restoration of world trade. The establishment of the
ITO should be a helpful safeguard in minimizing that danger.
There had been the attitude of the Fund from the beginning. He hoped
that their participation in the deliberations of the Preparatory Committee
in London, New York and Geneva, and in the discussion of those Articles
of the ITO Charter which were particularly close to their field of
responsibility, had served a useful purpose. As representatives had noted,
the Fund did not wish to limit the scope of the ITO, but rather to emphasize
their common interest in certain aspects of trade and payments problems.
It wanted ITO to know what it was doing and would continue to do, to help
meet the exchange and payments problems. It wanted the ITO to be an
effective instrument for dealing with the world's trade problems.
Representatives present had devoted many meetings to preparing the
Draft Charter being considered by the conference. He thought that a
magnificent job had been done. He did not mean that a perfect document
had been prepared. If he said so, it. would quite properly be doubted whether
/he spoke E/CONF. 2/SR.1
page 10
he spoke with full knowledge and complete sincerity. The difficulties
attending the task had been great. The achievement revealed the compromise
that was necessary for agreement. On the one hand, some extremely broad
principles to govern trade relations between members could be read in the
Draft of the Charter. On the other hand, one found just as broad and
probably many more exceptions to those principles. In many instances, those
escape clauses were a frank recognition of the fact that, under present
conditions, those principles were too strong a diet for a sick world. When
the patient had passed, through convalescence, all might hope that the
nourishing diet prescribed in the Charter would keep world trade in good
health.
In that regard, there would be no -doubt some people who would say that
it would have been more advisable to wait two or three years and then to
agree on a document embodying hard and fast adherence to,the principles of
the Charter. He was certain that consideration had been given. If the
Charter was not all, that it ht be, it was because they felt it was
urgent to start now. And quite rightly so. The dynamics of the present
time did not allow them to wait until perfect conditions assured the easy
functioning of a perfect world.
He felt he could speak with some authority on that point. The Fund
had had to begin its operations during a very critical period in international
financial relations. One might have waited for better times, until the
situation was more stable. It had been sometimes said that the Fund was a
fair-weather ship. Perhaps so; but if a fair-weather ship, by taking some
chances could save a number of lives in the midst of a storm, all would
agree with him that it should try to do so. And representatives would
agree with him that the seas of the world were rather stormy today. That
was why they had began their, work without regard to the harsh and
unfavourable economic climate. He did not regret that decision to go
ahead. If, by their common actions, imperfect as they might be, they could
spare humanity a year, a month, or even a week, of that economic tragedy,
it would have been worthwhile. It was far better to do something helpful,
incomplete and imperfect though it may be, than to do nothing at all,,
waiting ofr the beet to come. Never had the French proverb been more true"
'Le Mieux est l'ennemi du bien"
And if, as he had said, the text of the Charter was not perfect, he did
not think that was a reason for being discouraged. Texts wore one thing. The
spirit of the men in on international organization was another thing. Even
with a perfect text, if doubt and discord should prevail in the ITO, it would
be doomed to failure. Even with something short of a perfect text, the ITO
would be what the people who ran it made it; and if they acted in a sensible,
/practical E/CONF. 2/SR.1
Page 11
practical, co-operative spirit, the ITO, he was sure, would achieve
considerable results.
Of course, the task would be hard. The present time was difficult for
the establishment of principles to govern the trade relations of the world.
Many nations were struggling to maintain even a minimum level of consumption
for their people. Others were in the process of recasting their economic
and social structure. And nearly all were grappling with the consequences
of war that had left their production distorted, their monetary reserves
depleted, and their currencies inflated. All those factors increased the
difficulty of securing constructive co-operation within the community of
nations.
It was particularly difficult for a Government in those circumstances
to ask from their people a sacrifice, a renunciation of what they believed
to be their rights, a renunciation of what they believed to be their
interests, without being able to show them an immediate counterpart: the
real counterpart being the future increase in world trade, of which those
people could have their share.
Yes, it was difficult. Everything today was difficult, much more than
before. But he was confident that everything could be settled. Only two
things were needed for that: vision and courage. That vision and courage
still existed in the world had already been shown by the results they had
arrived at. Their long and arduous labour indicated that in spite of those
difficulties in many countries, in spite of the differences in economic
organization, the need for an International Trade Organization that would
establish principles of fair practice in international trade was generally
recognized throughout the world. Those principles, while flexible enough
to meet all emergencies, should facilitate steady economic progress in a
peaceful world. Above all, they must not allow present difficulties to
result in erecting new obstacles to trade which in future years might become
an insurmountable barrier to a prosperous world.
Some people might say: "If there are so many escape clauses in the
Charter, everybody will resort to them and no result will be attained".
That was, of course, a possible danger, but he thought it would not
materialize. Why? Because nations had come more and more to realize the
dangers with which they were threatened if they did not come to an agreement.
The time of illusions had passed, or almost passed. They have crumbled
between the two last world wars, and if there were some still remaining in
1945 or 1946, what had happened since then should be enough to destroy them.
Nations now realized, he hoped, that if no understanding was arrived at
between them, they were all headed for disaster, and that to arrive at an
/understanding E/CONF. 2/SR. 1
Page 12
understanding each of them would have to sacrifice customary restrictions,
preferences, advantages, in order to share in the general gains which would
result from a broad agreement. They would do much to avoid facing a
further contraction or disruption of international trade.
The Fund had studied carefully the successive drafts of the Charter
and he was glad to say that, subject to the approval of their Board of
Governors, they were willing to assume the obligations which were required
of them. The purposes of the International Trade Organization were their
purposes. Therefore, the co-operation between the Fund and the ITO had to
be wholehearted and mutual. The more they helped the International Trade
Organization in achieving its objectives the closer they got to the
accomplishment of their own.
Mr. Gutt said he hoped that the organization to be created would become
an effective instrument for international co-operation in the field of trade,
and that its work would progressively contribute toward the attainment of
that ultimate purpose they all share - the establishment of a peaceful and
prosperous world.
/4. MESSAGE FROM E/CONF.2/SR.1
Page 13
4. MESSAGE FROM THE INTERATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION
Mr. TAIT (Representative of the International Labour Organization) said
it was his privilege to bring to the conference greetings and good will from
the Director-General of the International Labour Organization and to express
his sincere hope that the Conference would be successful in achieving the
purposes for which it had met.
In the first place he wished to say how pleased he was that the
Conference was meeting in Havana, the city in which the ITO held its Second
American Regional Conference in 1939. All those who were present on that
occasion held the pleasentest memories of their sojourn on Cuban soil.
The fundamental purpose of the ILO was to raise living Standards through
agreements ong Governments and representatives of employers and of workers
on industrial and labour problems, and the ILO was therefore vitally
interested in the work of any other body which sought to achieve the same
purpose by other means. They welcomed the statement in the preamble of the
draft Charter which was submitted for the approval of representatives that
the work which they were undertaking was based on Article 55 (a) of the
Charter of the United Nations which proclaimed the imortance of attaining
higher standards of living, full employment and social progress and
development.
Mr. Tait thought that it was significant that in the draft Charter. the
statement of purpose and objectives was immediately followed by a chapter in
which it was proposed to include certain mutual undertakings in relation to
employment, production and effective demand. The amended Constitution of
the ILO placed the achievement and maintenance of full employment among the
aims and purposes for which the ILO should strive, and they were already
co-operating with the Economic and Social Council in that field.
In that connection he referred especially to the Article on Fair Labour
Standards in which specific reference was made to the ILO and said that on
that question, as on all other questions in Chapter II of the draft Charter,
the ILO would co-operate fully with the International Trade Organization.
On economic development the ILO also had a role to play, notably in
connection with the provision of technical skill by such means as vocational
training, the exchange of instructors and trainees, etc. He thought the
American Members of the Organization would undoubtedly recall the detailed
discussion of vocational training in relation to industrialization which
took place at the American Regional Conference in Mexico City in 1946. Since
then, a small tripartite committee to consider American regional co-operation
in that field had been established and had started to work. Similar
discussions had taken place within the last few leeks at the ILO Asian
/Regional E/CONF. 2/SR.1
Page 14
Regional Conference, and the question was also on the Agenda of the Near
and Middle East Conference at present meeting at Istambul.
He had no desire, however, to go into any further details. The
purpose of his message was general rather then specific. It was to express
the pleasure of the ILO at the progress so far made in drafting a Trade
Charter and in actually lowering the barriers of international trade,
thereby promoting the raising of living standards throughout the world.
They wanted to help in the work of the ILO and on occasion they might wish
to ask the ITO to help them. If the ITO was effectively established as a
result of the Conference, the Governing Body of the ILO, representing
employers and workers as well as Governments would, he was sure, be among
the first to offer its congratulations to a new specialized agency and to
offer its assistance in the immense task to which the Conference had set
its hands.
/5. MESSAGE FROM E/CONF. 2/SR.1
Page 15
5. MESSAGE FROM THE FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION
Mr. WYNDHAM WHITE (Executive Secretary of the Conference) read the
following message which had been received from the Council of FAO:
"The first session of the Council of FAO sends a message of
Greeting to the International Conference on Trade and Employment.
In the opinion of this Council, the matters on the Agenda of the
Havana Conference are of the utmost importance to the nations of the
world, and the Council expresses its confident hope for the
satisfactory, outcome of the Conference.
"Moreover, much of the subject matter is of direct importance
to the work of FAO. Improvement in agricultural production and
nutrition depends to no small extent on the progress made in promoting
a freer flow of international trade, and the Council attaches
importance to this aspect of ITO's functions.
"As regards trade in agricultural products FAO is pledged to the
twin objectives of expansion and price stability, and the Council
would recall the words of the Geneva Session of the FAO Conference,
that for a certain number of important commodities, commodity
agreements are the best means of assuring steady markets and price
stability at a fair level and thereby of encouraging primary producers
to plan with confidence!. This Council takes particular interest in
the Chapter in the Draft Charter concerning inter-governmental
commodity agreements, a field in which this Council itself has certain
functions under its Constitution. This Council believes that Member
Governments will find it useful to work both through FAO and through
ITO in their respective fields.
"The Council notes with special interest the Chapters of the
Draft Charter concerning employment and development. The FAO Conference
has clearly stated that in many important areas of the world,
agricultural progress depends on parallel industrial development. The
Council recognizes that the ITO, when established, will play an
important part in assisting Member Nations in programmes of development
and looks forward to close collaboration in these matters between the
two organizations.
"Both agricultural and industrial development can prosper only
in an expanding world economy toward which the International Trade.
Organization along with other international agencies can contribute
much.
"May therefore the International Trade Organization of the
United Nations be speedily established".
/6. ADDRESS BY E/CONF.2/SR.1
Page 16
6. ADDRESS BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION OF THE CONFERENCE
Mr. SUETENS (Belgium), Chairman of the Preparatory Commission, said that
he had the honour to submit to the united Nations Plenary Conference on
trade and Employment the Draft Charter prepared by the Preparatory Committee
established under the decision of the Economic and Social Council of
18 February 1946.
The Preparatory Committee, of which he had had the honour and pleasure
to be Chairman, had hold two sessions, one in London from 15 October to
26 November 1946, and the other in Genova from 10 April to 30 October 1947
Between the two sessions a Drafting Committee had met in New York from
20 January to 25 February 1947.
Altogether, the Preparatory Committee had held nearly 650 meetings in
connection with the drafting of the Charter, and almost 1,000 meetings in
connection with the bilateral negotiations which had led to the conclusion
of a General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. He did not think that there
were many conferences which had accomplished so much work within an equal
period of time. That was definitely the result, on the one hand, of the
spirit of co-operation which had animated the various delegations and, on the
other, of the zeal and efficiency of the Secretariat.
The Draft Charter which was submitted was a composite product. It had
four quite distinctive and well-defined objects.
Its first object was to give international trade relations the security
they required by means of a universally recognized code of rules. In the
present state of affairs those rules resulted from commercial treaties.
The clauses of such treaties were not all alike, however. They were not
sufficiently general in character. They were sometimes contradictory and
the majority of them were ill-adapted - or not at all adapted to the new
techniques of commercial policy. It was necessary to reconsider, clarify
and codify them. He wished to mention the most favoured-nation treatment
clause, clauses dealing ;ith quantitative restrictions, with transit,
subsidies, anti-dumping and countervailing duties, customs formalities in
general and so on, It had been found necessary to go far beyond the scope
of ordinary commercial treaties and to establish completely new rules
regarding restrictive business practices, namely, agreements concluded
directly between private interests with the object of restraining competition
by fixing prices and export quotas and by sharing markets. Such agreements
had as much influence on trade as ordinary commercial agreements. It would
be impossible to conceive of a complete code of rules for commercial policy
which did not cover such practices. It was the first time an
inter-governmental agreement had entered the field which was formerly left
/to the discretion E/CONF. 2/SR .1
Page. 17
to the discretion of private interosts
The second object of the Charter was the establishment of an Organization
including on tho one hand bodies meeting at regular intervals and, on the
other, a permanent administration to see that the rules laid down by the
Charter were respected and to settle any disputes or claims which might arise
in international economic relations, cither by mutual agreement or by moans
of legal proceedings. In that sphere, the Draft Charter called, among other
things, for the constitution of an International Trade Organization and
established its Statutes.
The third object arose out of Article 17 which stated that Members
should enter into mutual "negotiations directed to the substantial reduction
of tariffs and other charges on imports and exports and to the elimination
of preferences . .. on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis". That
part of the programme had already been put into effect. On 10 April the
States represented on the Preparatory Committee began negotiations among
themselves which were continued without interruption for six months
culminating in a multilateral agreement, to which the final touches wore put
on 30 October last. That agreement, which was made public only a few days
ago, was the largest undertaking of its kind ever to be realized. It
included the results of some 100 bilateral negotiations carried out at
Geneva. Each country made a direct offer to the other country of all the
tariff concessions made by it, whether in the form of reductions, bindings
or the reduction or elimination of preferences. Thousands of tariff items
had been affected. The trade thus involved was estimated at $10,000,000,000
or more than half the import trade of the countries represented ate Geneva
and a little loss than half the pre-war world import trade. The commitments
of some countries were in the noighbourhood of eighty per cent.
The comprehensive list of concessions was preceded by a number of
clauses, mostly drawn from the Draft Charter, which guaranteed the genuine
value of the concessions until the Charter came into force.
The first part of that international agreement reaffirmed the principle
of most-favoured-nation treatment as stated in Article 16 of the Draft
Charter. It imposed on the countries which negotiated the concessions the
obligations to observe and to maintain them. It provided that the countries
concerned could enter into joint consultations if they considered that a
product included in the list of concessions was not receiving the treatment
accorded in the agreement.
The main purpose of the second part of the General Agreement was the
reaffirmation of a number of principles and provisions of Chapter IV of the
Draft Charter (commercial policy) and to some extent of Chapter III
/(economic E/CONF.2/SR.1
Page 18
(economic development).
The third part dealt with subjects raised by the agreement itself and
not included in the Charter. It was important to note that countries
participating in tho agreement were to meet regularly and that their first
meeting had to be held before next March. If the Charter had not, come into
force within a reasonable time, measures to amend, complete and maintain
the General Agreement were contemplated, if that should be necessary.
By a protocol open for signature from 30 October 1947, Australia,
Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Canada, France, the United States
and the United Kingdom had undertaken to put the agreement into effect on
a provisional basis as from 1 January 1948. Article 17 laid down the
conditions under which other countries might participate in the agreement.
But that was not all. Neither the establishment of principles nor the
formation of an organization to provide a general safeguard and machinery
for conciliation, and arbitration could suffice for maintaining and expanding
trade. Ho would quote at that point what he had said at Geneva: "The law
provides security. It does not establish anything by itself. One might
even go further. The reestablishment of free trade by itself would not be
enough. There must also be definite co-operative action in the fields
governing trade, namely production, consumption, employment and general
economic development, and in particular the general economic development
of the under-developed countries, In all those fields the action to be
taken was primarily dependent upon national sovereignty. Each country
must have its own policy. But the various policies thus involved would
run the risk of conflicting with one another if they wore not controlled
by concerted action". The rules for such concerted action form an
important part of the Charter and are its fourth object.
Similarly, mention might be made of the rules laid down in regard to
inter-Governmental commodity control agreements. The regulation of the
production and consumption of, and trade in, primary commodities had been
recognized as necessary in a number of cases. Procedure had been
established whereby such control could be exorcised in a manner, conforming
with the general purposes of the Charter.
The work, such as it was, was not complete. In spite of the good will
shown by all, it had not been possible to reach unanimity on a certain
number of points, and some delegations had made reservations regarding
various clauses. There were also a certain number of questions which had
boon left open. After careful consideration the Committee recognized that
it was not qualified to settle them and that that task could only be
performed by the Plenary Conference. It had prepared alternative solutions
/regarding E/CONF.2/SR.1
Page 19
regarding such points, however, and was submitting them to the Conference
That solution was adopted as regards voting arrangements (Article 72), the
composition of thc Executive Board (Article 75), the interpretation and
settlement of differences (Articles 89 to 92) and finally relations with
Non-Members (Article 93).
The work was not only not complete, but was also not perfect. It was
with the greatest modesty that they were submitting to the Conference the
results of their work. They were not unaware of the criticisms levelled
against it, of which two in particular must claim their attention.
The first of then might be summarized as follows: The Charter could
have been useful, if it had been comprised by a combination of strict
rules. Unfortunately that had not been the case. It contained a large
number of exceptions, resolutery and even escape clauses, so that it did
not afford any real assurances but only precarious and hazarduous guarantees.
He would reply frankly and say that those criticisms were well founded. The
situation with which they had been confronted, and which was also confronting
the present Conference, must not be forgotton. If all countries were at
the same level of economic development and had the same form of commercial
policy, similar monetary resources and policies, and comparable
responsibilities, it would be a fairly simple matter to evolve a strict code.
That was unfortunately not the case. After the war, which had undermined
the very foundations of the machinery of trade and had ruined many States,
the burdens, needs and the possibilities of various countries were profoundly
different. The problem was one of finding formulas making it in the interest
of each country to subscribe to the Agreement, whilst placing the same
burden of obligation on each. On the other hand, the Charter must respect
the autonomy of each party, the autonomy of these countries having a
liberal economy, that of those countries having State monopolies and
whose foreign trade itself was a monopoly, and that of those whose foroign
trade was designed for purposes of reconstruction, of industrial development
or of price stabilization. All the rules of the Charter must be acceptable
to those various types of countries and be adaptable to the nature of the
different economic system involved.
For the above reasons, their work could only be one of compromise.
Its weakness should not, therefore, cause either surprise or alarm. The
Charter was continuously growing. Its text afforded opportunities for
revision. Furthermore, both the work of the bodies to be established and
the International Trade Organization itself would continue to improve the
present text.
/The second E/CONF. 2/SR .1
Page 20
The second criticism in question was directed against the character of
the Charter itself. It was reproached for being academic. It was considered
to afford but few solutions to the distressing problems which the various
countries had to face today. That criticism was perhaps justified some
months ago, but that was certainly not so at the present time. The
conclusion of the General Tariff Agreement fully demonstrated what might
be expected of the Charter and of those who had signed it. They were at
pains to comply with one of their major obligations even before the Plenary
Conference came to consider their work.
It was something of a consolation, on the other hand, to note that the
Conference of Sixteen which met at Paris to study Europe's difficulties
referred to the Charter on several occasions and made certain recommendations
regarding it. No better tribute than that could be paid to the concrete
and practical character of the Preparatory Committee's work.
If a further example of that realism were required, he could refer to
the stand taken in regard to preferential agreements. The rules of
commercial policy in that respect were extremely strict before the war. As
regards normal relations between countries not forming part of the same
political entity, there were two possible formulas: on the one hand, the
most-favoured-nation treatment, and, on the other hand, a customs union.
Any other scheme was heterodox. On that account, for example, such attempts
at gradually lowering tariff walls as the Ouchy Convention, signed in 1932
between the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg, were abortive. The
Economic Committee of the League of Nations drew attention to that
deficiency on several occasions and had even proposed solutions. It could
now be seen that under Article 42 of the Charter, before the effective entry
into force of a customs union, transitional stages having a preferential
character might be contemplated. Similarly, Article 15 provided that under
certain circumstances preferential arrangements might be concluded in the
interests of the programmes of economic development or reconstruction of
one or more countries.
In that respect, as representatives knew, thirteen of the countries
which participated in the Conference of Sixteen at Paris to draw up a table
of Europe's economic needs decided to study the possibility of concluding
a customs union between European countries. That study group, comprising
delegates or observers from twenty-two countries, met at Brussels on
10 - 15 November. After certain statements, inter alia those of the
representatives of the Netherlands and of his own country, had been heard,
it was decided to establish a Preparatory Committee which should be
entrusted with assembling technical information. A second meeting was
/contemplated E/CONF. 2/SR.1
Page 21
contemplated for the last two weeks of January 1948.
He would say no more about the work of the Preparatory Committee. It
had tackled the matter three times, and had reconsidered the main questions
confronting it at least twice. He sincerely believed that the texts
submitted to the Conference not only took more fully into consideration
the concrete difficulties which all had to face in their foreign trade
relations, but alos, as regarded coherence, logic and clarity, constituted
an improvement on the texts drawn un at London and New York.
Their work was one of good faith in every sense of the term. They
would be happy if the Conference would accept it as such, and even happier
if it could find solutions to the particularly controversial issues involved
which were superior to those of the Preparatory Committee. On his own
behalf and on behalf of the countries represented on the Preparatory
Committee, he wished the Plenary Conference good luck.
7. EXPRESSION OF THANKS
His Excellency Dr. Gonzalez MUNOZ (Temporary Chairman) expressed his
gratitude for the privilege of sharing with the United Nations Secretariat
the high responsibility of inaugurating the Conference. He would do all he
could towards making the Conference a success.
8. CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
Mr. Wyndham WHITE (Executive Secretary of the Conference) announced that
an informal meeting of heads of delegations would be held the following
morning at 10.30, followed by a plenary meeting for the election of the
Chairman and officers of the Conference.
The meeting rose at 6 p.m. |
|
GATT Library | hc792vv9013 | Summary Record of the Fourteenth Meeting : Held at Lake Success on 5 February 1947 at 10:30 a.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, February 5, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 05/02/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/48 and E/PC/T/C.6/37-55 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hc792vv9013 | hc792vv9013_90230099.xml | GATT_155 | 684 | 4,718 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/ 48
AND ECONOMIQUE 5February 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DRAFTING COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FOURTEENTH MEETING
Held. at Lake Success on 5 February 1947 at 10:30 a.m.
Chairman: H.E. M. Erik Colban
1. Article 38, The Committee, after review, approved. the London text of
this .Article and decided. to mention a Chilean reservation to this Article
in its Report
2. Article 39The Delegate of Cenada moved. for deletion of the last
sentence of paragraph 1, which had. been added to paragraph 1 in the twelfth
meeting of the Committee, and. after the Delegate of the United Kingdom
explained. that he had no strong feeling on the matter, the Committee agreed
to delete this last sentence.
3. Article 44. The Committee approved the London text.
4. Article 45, paragraph 1, Sub-paragraph (c). The Committee debated the
Canadian suggestion, contained in E/PC/T/C.6/W.35, to insert sub-paragraph (c)
of paragraph 1 in the formulation of the United. States Draft Charter
(Article 40, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph (c)).
The United. Kingdom, seconding the Canadian suggestion, proposed. the
following formulation of the new sub-paragraph .(c): ."Agreements or
understandings concerning any formof services, save insofar as these are
directly; ancillary to transactions and goods". After the ensuing debate
revealed the ambiguity of this clause, the United Kingdom Delegate withdrew
this formulation.
The debate on insertion of sub-paragraph. (c) centered around, the
folloeing issue: one group of countries, especially Brazil, Belgium, China and.
India, expressed the view that reinsertion of this sub-paragraph would.
consuitute a substantive change of the Longon draft. The question of
/services E/PC/T/C.6/48
Page 2
services had. been. exhaustively debated. in London without reaching agreement,
and consequently, this matter should be left to the deliberetion of the
Second. Sessin of the Preparatory Committee.
Arother group of countries, especially Canada, the United Kingdom,
Australia and France, wore of the opinion that whereas the issue of inclusion
or. exclusion of services in the International Trade Organization Charter was
a substantive issue to be decided at the Second Session of the Preparatory
Committee, the Drafting Committee, under its terms of reference, would have
to draft provisions on the issue, which specific services will be excluded
from this Chapter even if services in general fall under the Charter. For
this reason., sub-paragraph (c) in the formulation of Article 40; paragraph 1,
sub-paragraph (C) of the United States Draft charter should be reinserted or
similar provisions should be formulated. The CHILEAN Delegate referred to
Chile a reservation at the First Session of the Preparatory Committee and
declared. himself ready to accept the CANADIAN proposal if the United States
Draft Charter text of sub-paragraph (c) would be changed in such a manner as
to exclude those services which fall under the jurisdiction of the
United. Nations or Specialized Agencies of the United. Nations. The
UNITED KINGDOM, supported. by CANADA moved for the appointment of an ad. hoc
drafting , group to prepare a text on the basis of the United. States Draft
Charter text and the Chilean reservation.
The CHAIRMAN ruled that the Secretariat should in collaboration with
the CHILEAN Delegate, elaborate such a text and the Committee agreed to
leave the london text without insertion of sub-paragraph (c) but to refer
in its Report to this debate and. to include the formulation of
sub-praragraph (c) as elaborated by the Secretariat and, the CHILEAN Delegate.
5. Reservations, The Secretary requested. the Delegations who had made
those reservations which are contained in the specific instructions to the
Drafting Committee (E/PC/T/C.III/W.5) to clarify their present position on
these reservations and all Delegations sustained. their reservations contained
in this document.
/A short E/PC/T/C. 6/48
Page 3
A short debate ensued whether all reservations recorded in London
Should be considered sustained unless expressly withdrawn and the Committee
agreed to this proposition.
6. The UNITED STATES Delegate moved to defer consideration of Chapter VII
for Thursday, 6 Februaru, to give the Delegates time to study E/PC/T/C.6/W.46
and the meeting was adjourned until 10:30 a.m. 6 February 1947. |
GATT Library | hv669wy9531 | Summary Record of the Fourteenth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Monday, 29 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 29, 1947 | Second Committee: Economic Development | 29/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.14 and E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.1-17 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hv669wy9531 | hv669wy9531_90180454.xml | GATT_155 | 2,322 | 14,865 | United Nations Nations Unies E/CONF./C.2/SR.14
29 December 1947
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SECOND COMMITEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FOURTEENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Monday, 29 December 1947 at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. E. ABELLO (Philippines)
1. ARTICLE 13: GENERAL DISCUSSION (Continued)
Mr. DUNAWAY (Liberia) said that his delegation was in general agreement
with the provisions of Article 13, but considered that any weakening of the
safeguards against the use of protective measures would be fatal to the
Charter.
Mr. TORRES (Brazil) emphasized that the Charter would be a compromise one
and that all countries would have to make sacrifices if a document covering
the interests of all nations was to be drawn up. Referring to quantitative
restrictions, he pointed out that Brazil's attitude towards those restrictions
had been influenced by the fact that the Charter had to be regarded as a
whole. It was better to have an imperfect Charter which could be improved than
to sign a theoretically perfect document which could not be changed to give
satisfaction to those who had been injured by its operation. Therefore the
voting system should be just and the Executive Board should represent in an
equitable manner the various economic structures of the world. It had still
to be decided which organ would examine quantitative restrictions and his
delegation would support the setting up of an Economic Development Committee
to guide the Executive Board in such matters. Quantitative restrictions should
be kept under control and should not be misused, and the decisions of the ITO
concerning their use should be subject to the strict criterion of
impartiality and fairness.
The delegation of Brazil considered that the rules laid down in
Article 13 should be more precise; Article 13 should state the organ which
would examine questions covered by that Article and should refer to a right
of appeal to the Conference from its decisions. Mr. Torres further suggested
that the process of consultation referred to in paragraph 2 (b) should be
limited to the principal supplier and such other suppliers of the product in
question as the ITO might decide. The phrase "and on its long-term effects
on the standard of living within the country contemplating the measure" should
/be added E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.14 Page 2
be added to paragraph 2 (c). The Sub-Committee dealing with Article 13
should study paragaph 4 (b) with great care to see whether a flexible
criterion might be laid. down as a guide to a country wishing to secure
permission to use quantitative restrictions. A note should be added. to
Article 13 explaining that the word "Organization." meant the Executive Board
of the ITO, and that there would. be a right of appeal from the decisions
of that body to the Conference as was at present provided in paragraph 3
of Article 90. It should be understood that the measures adopted unilaterally
under paragraph 4 (c) would continue pending a ruling by the Conference,
should the interested country appeal to it from a decision of the Executive
Board. The wording of the last sentence of paragraph 5 (c) should be
clarified to show that the time limit for action by the Conference of ITO
would be laid down by the Conference itself.
2. ARTICLE 13: EXAMINATION OF AMENDMENTS (Document E/CONF.2/C.2/22)
Mr. GUTIERREZ (Cuba), referring to the amendments submitted by his
delegation to paragraphs 1, 2 (a), (b) and 4 (b) and (c) of Article 13, said
that that Article was the result of a compromise between the most divergent
opinions, and was generally accepted by his delegation. Although the Cuban
delegation supported the point of view that the decision of the ITO should be
binding in case of a controversy regarding the application of protective
measures by a country, it was evident that in .certain cases of emergency it
would be fatal to a country's economy to await the prior authorization of
the ITO before protective measures were brought into effect.
The delegation of Cuba considered that maintenance was a form of
development and had therefore suggested the insertion of the word "maintenance"
in paragraph 1. It also felt that a term such as "quantitative restrictions"
should. not be left to individual interpretation. Paragraph 4 (b) was well
drafted, but Mr. Gutierrez felt that the amendment suggested by his
Government would. make its meaning clearer.
Mr. CABILI (Philippines) said the amendment to Article 13 submitted by
his delegation was consequential on the amendment submitted to Article 14,
and he reserved the right of his delegation to withdraw the former should
the latter not be adopted. The delegation of the Philippines regarded the
work of reconstruction of war-devastated and under-developed countries as
a transitional matter, and therefore considered that the word "reconstruction"
should be deleted from Article 13. Article 13 should not contain any
reference to questions of a transitional character.
Mr. THOMAS (New Zealand) said his delegation felt that there might be
occasions when a country found it necessary to afford. assistance to industries
or branches of agriculture which were already established, and considered
/that that E/CONF. 2/C . 2/SR.14
Page 3
that that position should be covered. in the Charter, The idea of maintenance
should therefore be made quite clear in the text of paragraph 1 of Article 13.
The adoption of the New Zealand amendment would involve a consequential
amendment to paragraph 4 (c).
Mr. IGONET (France), supported by Mr. BAYER (Czechoslovak a), said he
could not agree with the amendment submitted by the delegation of the
Philippines that the word "reconstruction" should be deleted. It was
impossible for countries which had suffered war damage to foretell at present
which of their industries might need the help of protective measure.s He
therefore strongly urged the maintenance of the word. "reconstruction".
Mr. MACIZK (Ireland) supported the amendments, submitted by the
representatives of Cub aand of New Zealand. His Government considered
provisions for the imposition of special measures to maintain as well as to
develop industries of particular importance, and was anxious to see such
provisions embodied in Article 13.
Mr. REISMAN (Canada) said his delegation viewed with concern the
amendments proposed by the representatives of. Cuba and of New Zealand, and
considered that they should not be incorporated. in the Charter. Article 20
of the Charter-envisaged. the use of quantitative restrictions for protection
only in the case of economic development and provided for the maintenance of
existing Industries by the use of tariffs and subsidies. To introduce the
concept that quantitative restrictions might be used for normal protective
purposes would endanger one of the basic principles of the Oharter. The
second. amendment proposed by the delegation of Cuba that a country should be
permitted to adop such restrictions in order to protect itself against
similar measures adopted by countries, when in balance of payments
difficulties, was equally dangerou.s
M.r ROBLES, (Guatemala) supported the amendments submitted. by the
representative of Cuba, but suggested that. the word. "maintenance". should. be
replaced, by. the word promotion. Le could not agree .with the amendment
presented. by. the delegation of the Philippinee that the. word. "reconstruction"
should be deleted as n oone know how long the post-war reconstruction period.
would last.
Mr. ADARKAR (India) stated. that the amendments proposed by his delegation
consisted mainly of a new paagrraph to Article 13 and. other amendments were
conequwential upon the insertion of that new pargraaph. It had been
considered neceseray to refer to Articles 18, 20 and 31 in the amendment as
measuresd elat.w ith. in those Articles were more or less similar in effect
.d.could,be used. a.ternatively to promote the same end' As the,issue raised
by the Indian, amendment had also been raised as a result of amendments
submitted, by other delegations in Committee III, the delegation of India would
/agree to its E/CONF.2/C.2/SR.14
Page 4
agree to its amendment also being submitted to that Committee for
consideration.
Mr. COREA (Ceylon) agreed in principle with the statement of the
representative of Brazil, but considered it would be bettor not to have a
Charter than to have one which would prevent economic development. The
amendment to Article 13 submitted by the delegation of Ceylon was similar
to that submitted by the delegation of India. Article 13 as at present
drafted referred to measures which conflicted with the obligations incurred
by members in the course of negotiations and also with the provisions of
Chapter IV. The delegation of Ceylon accepted the principle of prior
approval being obtained from ITO before restrictions were imposed. It
considered, however, that where a country's economy would suffer seriously
from the delay resulting from a request for prior approval that country should
have the right to adopt such measures immediately, at the same time informing
the ITO of its action. The ITO would then investigate the matter and inform
the member of its decision, which would be binding.
Pointing out that it was not yet known which organ of the ITO would
deal with differences arising out of the imposition of quantitative
restrictions, Mr. Corea said his delegation had some misgivings in case the
members composing that organ were convinced, that quantitative restrictions
should be abolished or allowed in exceptional circumstances only. Article 13
could be viewed in a different light if the whole matter were referred. to a
Judicial body or to a board which had no direct interest in the matter, .
Mr. Corea emphasized that it should not be forgotten that the Charter
would have to be ratified by countries with very different standards and the
same rules could not be applied to all of them.
Mr. NOVQA (Mexico) said that Article 13, as it now read, was useless,
complicated and dangerous. The procedure which it set forth was not only
lengthy, it was also ambiguous, The meaning of the word "promptly", for
example, was nowhere clearly defined in the Charter. Before a country could
contemplate the creation of new industries, it would be necessary to
ascertain from where the tools, the technical advice and the resources were
to come. The indefinite time limit laid down in Article 13 would be a great
handicap in that connection.
Article 13 was complicated by the inclusion of references both to
measures contrary to the provisions of the Charter and measures against the
terms of treaties previously adopted. A request for permission to establish
restrictive measures could result in a country's having its market flooded
with products which it was attempting to keep out, as a result of previous
knowledge on the part of countries producing those products.
/The right Page 5
The right to establish quantitative restrictions was recognized in
Article 13 but was subject to conditions which would. make their adoption
impossible. It was generally agreed that quantitative restrictions could not
be used. for the general protection of the economy of a country and that
their adoption had to be subject to precise limitations. The Mexican
delegation felt, however, that it was for the country itself to decide
when such restrictions were justified.
The Mexican amendment perhaps did not provide the only solution and its
aim also could be achieved by making certain changes throughout Article 13,
Any amendment which was to prove acceptable, however, would have to take
into consideration the necessity for speed and the confidential character of
projects for the establishment of restrictive measures.
Mr. LIEU (China) emphasized that his delegation did not object to
prior approval by the Organization in principle, but only with reference to
Article 13. His Government had no intention of applying quantitative
restrictions indiscriminately, but in connection with the promotion of
economic development there would. be instances where protective measures
would be needed urgently and where the delay which would occur in obtaining
prior approval could have a disastrous effect.
The Article, as it now read, did not provide sufficient opportunity
for the establishment of restrictive measures, nor did it take into
consideration the importance of the time element. The essential aspect
of economic development was increased domestic production, yet new industries
could be ruined during the time in which the Organization was consulting
with the member states concerned.
Mr. Lieu did not insist on the exact wording of his amendment. Some
proposal along the lines of the Indian amendment would be acceptable, though
he felt that it should apply to other provisions of the Charter as well
as to Articles 18, 20 and 31.
Mr. de Leon BELLOC (Argentina) again expressed his opposition to the
idea of an Organization which would become the directing force in the
economic policy of each member state. He supported alI amendments which
advocated the abolition of the necessity for prior approval by the
Organization.
Mr. FARINA (Uruguay) said that although his delegation was prepared
to accept many provisions which were against the interests of Uruguay, it
was unable to agree to the Geneva Charter without certain changes The
Organization must not become a supra-governmental body and therefore, prior
consultation with it should not be made obligatory.
Mr. IGONET (France) E/CONF. 2/C.2/SR.14
Page 6.
Mr. IGONET (France) recalled that, originally, his delegation had
taken the position that the subordination of member states to an ITO
which might at tines act unwisely, was undesirable. It had come to the
conclusion, however, that a decision of the Organization was more one of
an umpire than of a supreme autonomous body.
A country had to take into account the economies of other countries for
otherwise, a country, the economic life of which had been damaged, would
take retaliatory measures. Such measures, in the long run, would adversely
affect not only the countries against which they were directed, but also
the country which had applied them.
It might be possible to reword the Article so as to meet the views of
certain delegations concerning undesirable delays, but he approved the
retention of the necessity for prior approval by the Organization.
The meeting rose at 1.05 p.m. |
GATT Library | dp088wx5081 | Summary Record of the Fourteenth Meeting (III b) : Held at the Capitol, Haavan, Cuba Thursday, 18 December 1947, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 18, 1947 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy | 18/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.14 and E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/dp088wx5081 | dp088wx5081_90190234.xml | GATT_155 | 2,214 | 14,703 | United Nations Nations Unies UNRESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.14 18 December 1947
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH WS
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCEET DE L'EMPLOI
TTTEE=R COMMERIgr :COO CIA PQLIC
S*RCORY E0DTH O MURTEENTH EEETING FMIIiiMOM l
Held at the Capitol, Haavan, Cuba
Thursday, 18 December 1947, at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. L. D. GREWILSS (Canada)
1. E LEOCTION-F VICHAIEM-NCRA
Upon the proposal of Mr. MARTIN (United States of America) supported by
the representatives of the Netherlands, Mexico and Uruguay,
Mr. Carlos Lleras-Restrepo (Colombia) was declared unanimously elected
Vice-Chairman.
2. DUuISSSION OTN SIEM 1, 2 and 26
Mr.T GUIERREZ (Bolivia) expressed surprise at the abruptness of decisions
of the Chair, particularly in regard to the amendments to Article 20 submitted
by the delegations of Argentina, Ceylon and Chile. He recognized the
efficiency of the Chairman and the necessity to expedite the work of the
Conference, but emphasized that the sovereign rights of states should not be
disregarded.
The CHAIRMAN stated he was entirely at the disposal of the Committee
and was guided by their decisions. It was to be regretted if anyone felt
he had been deprived of the right of further exposition. The point at issue
had been resolved by taking the dense of the committee: the verbatim records,
of the meeting on Saturday, 13 December and of subsequent meetings had been
consulted and it seemed clear that full opportunity to speak had been given.
However, he now wished to re-open the matter and to ascertain the view of
the Committee.
Mr. MURLLE (Chile) regretted his inability to agree with the
interpretation by the Chair of the decision taken by sense of the committee
on 13 December, though he held the Chairman in the highest esteeHm. e would
maintain that the Committee's decision, on two occasions, was that the
Argentine, Chilean and Cnelaese amendments to Article 20 be referred to
Committee II only for study and not that they should be transferred to that
Committee finally and absolutely. Since the amendments related to
quantitative restrictions, they properly belonged Cinp hater IV; discussion
/and decision E/CONF .2/C . 3/SR. 14
Page 2
and decision therefore rested with Committee III.
Mr. CHARLONE (Uruguay) and Mr. BRIGNOLI (Argentina) also felt the
decision was one of procedure and not of substance.
Mr. STUCKI (Switzerland) thought it best to reverse the decision since
Committee III was competent to discuss the subject. The delegations
concerned had submitted amendments to Article 20 and should therefore be
allowed to put their case to Committee III.
Mr. BURGESS (United Kingdom) stated the decision had been motivated by
the desire to avoid duplication of discussion. He proposed that the
amendments should first be considered by Committee II and that Committee III
then give the fullest consideration to its recommendations.
Mr. COREA (Ceylon) suggested that Committee II study the amendments,
on the understanding that Committee III was only suspending its first
reading of Article 20 to await the result of its deliberations of
Committee II.
Mr. MULLER (Chile) stated that since the whole Chapter dealt with
economic development, it was beside the point to refer an amendment to the
committee concerned with economic development simply because it contained a
specific mention of economic development. The Chilean amendment was
concerned primarily with quantitative restrictions; he would deplore its
defeat for procedural reasons and would insist on the legality of his point
of view.
The CHAIRMAN felt there was no real difference of opinion: if
Committee II decided the amendments could not be fitted in under Economic
Development, they would be referred back to and reconsidered by Committee III.
The VICE-CHAIRMAN suggested that the three amendments be referred to the
sub-committee considering all amendments to Article 20.
Mr. MARTIN (United States of America) did not agree with the criticism
of the Chair: twice the Committee had decided that since Committee II was
especially established to consider problems of economic development, it would
be a duplication to discuss that subject in Committee III. It was consistent
to refer these amendments to Committee II, because that Committee was
considering procedures whereby any provisions of Chapter IV might be
suspended or rendered temporarily inoperative in respect of a particular
country or industry. -
IfCommittee II found that the subject matter of thmseme andts cmeAuld
not be covered by ChapteIrI I but thought them worthy of incluisioin n the
Charter, then it would refer the matter back to CommitteIIIe for action;
on the other hand, should Committee II decide against the amendmen,ts
Committee III wou ldpresumably reach a similar conclusion, since the
membership of both committees was the same. The decision already taken
should be adhered .to
/M0r YERRO (France) E,/CONF. 2/C. 3/SR.14
Page 3
Mr. ROYER (France) stated that whether the decision was reached in
Committee II or III, each country's right to speak was safeguarded.
Decisions of either Committee on their respective Charters would call for
mutual adjustments. The matter would eventually be referred to a
sub-committee and duplication of discussion was to be avoided. But the wishes
of the authors should be followed in deciding which Committee should consider
the amendments.
Mr. BLUSZTAJN (Poland) felt that the reference of all amendments
concerning economic development to Committee II would establish an unwise
precedent which could result in the formation of two separate Charters. In
any case, either Committee would give due consideration to the recommendations
of the other.
Mr. MULLER (Chile) agreed with the view of the representative of France
and if his wishes were consulted, would have the Chilean amendment discussed
in Committee III.
Mr. BRIGNOLI (Argentina) agreed with the delegate of Chile.
Mr. MARTIN (United States of America) emphasized that his interest was
only in avoiding duplication and was in no way prejudicial to full and fair
consideration of the amendments. The amendments could be discussed either
in Committee II or in a joint Sub-Committee.
Mr. LLORENTE (Philippines) asked that the sense of the Committee be
taken on the motion of the representative of Colombia.
Mr. STUCKI (Switzerland) agreed with the statement of the representative
of France and proposed that the wishes of the authors be deferred to.
The CHAIRMAN said it appeared to be the consensus of the Committee to
accede to the wishes of the authors to consider the amendments in
Committee III; the original decision should be reconsidered.
Mr. McCARTHY (Australia) stated that the decision already taken had
represented the views of the majority and that the Chairman had interpreted
it correctly. If the decision were reversed, complications would arise. The
same problem had arisen in Geneva and had been dealt with satisfactorily
by reference to Committee II. In London, in Geneva and in Havana joint
sub-committees had taken over such matters.
Mr. CHARLONE (Uruguay) felt that since the amendments concerned the
use of quantitative restrictions as a means of maintaining equilibrium of
balance of payments, discussion rightly belonged in Committee III..
Mr. BURGESS (United Kingdom) withdrew his proposal in favour of that
made by the representative of the United States of America,
The CHAIRMAN, replying to a point of order raised by the
representative of URUGUAY, said he would first put to the vote the proposal
of the representative of Swritzerland.
/Mr. MARTIN (United States of America) E/CONF .2 /C .3/SR .14
Page 4
Mr. MARTIN (United States of America) pointed out that his proposal did
not preclude consideration of the three amendments by the Third Committee,
but simply provided that, after such consideration, they should be referred
to a Joint sub-committee of the Second and Third Committees.
Mr. d'ASCOLI (Venezuela) supported the Swiss proposal.
Mr. PEREZ (Colombia) supported the United States proposal.
The proposal of the representative of Switzerland that the Third Committee
should consider the amendments proposed to Article 20 by the delegations of
Argentina, Ceylon and Chile, was adopted.
3. Article 20 - (continuation of discussion of proposed amendments and
Geneva draft notes (document E/CONF.2/C.3/7)
Mr. d'ASCOLI (Venezuela) said his delegation reserved its right to
make observations at the second reading of Article 20 as it was awaiting
instructions from its Government. Venezuela had never made use of
quantitative restrictions, but might find it necessary to take certain
measures in the future in order to make appropriate use of its available
foreign exchange, since its export trade depended largely on a single mineral
product.
U NYUN (Burma) considered that quantitative restrictions were essential
for the industrial development of under-developed countries. Burma was
an agricultural country, but also had sugar and salt industries, and seasonal
employment for agricultural workers was provided by spinning, weaving and
pottery-making. Burma was also rich in minerals and forests. The most
economic and efficient way of developing those natural resources was by
setting up local, industries and encouraging the expansion of existing ones.
Those never industries would have to be protected from the competition of the
highly industrialized nations by measures which would not upset the
general economic equilibrium of Burma, as would high tariffs. The most
efficient and the most simple method of protecting such industries was by
quantitative restrictions. The Charter of the ITO should therefore contain a
provision recognizing the right of under-developed countries to adopt such
restrictions for achieving economic development.
Mr. FORTHOMME (Belgium) pointed out that Belgium had always been in
favour of and had stimulated economic development in all parts of the world as
the best means of ensuring a constantly increasing effective demand. His
delegation, however, could not accept any distinction between the position of
the so-called under-developed. countries and the industrialized countries.
Industrial and economic development was an evolution. It was true, as
certain representatives of so-called under-developed countries had said, that
it was essential for them to develop their untouched resources of raw
materials. If, however, economic development was to be carried out without
/proper co-ordination, E/CONF.2/C .3/SR.14
Page 5
proper co-ordination, the industrialized countries would be faced with the
need for a re-adaptation of their entire economic structure.
Mr. NASH (New Zealand) could not agree fully with the remarks of the
representative of Belgium, and pointed out that highly industrialized countries
had a good start over those countries which were still under-developed. His
delegation had no amendments to suggest to Article 20. The exchange control
policy of New Zealand was covered by the provisions of Article 21 and
related clauses. Referring to the question raised by the representative of
Colombia as to whether control of exports for the purpose of controlling
exchange came within the scope of Article 20, Mr. Nash said that that matter
was covered by Article 24. New Zealand had never restricted exports.
Exports were controlled by a.system of licensing which laid down that funds
coming from the sale of products overseas should be paid into the Reserve
Bank,. which was Government controlled. A distinction should be drawn between
measures applied to exports or imports which restricted trade and those which
merely regulated trade. He therefore felt the term used should be
"quantitative regulations" and not "quantitative restrictions". He
supported the proposal of the representative of Australia to delete the
word "temporarily' in sub-paragraphs (a) of paragraph 2 of Article 20.
It would be impossible for New Zealand to develop economically under
a system of restricted free trade. It would not be practicable to have a
free trade policy and an equitable standard of living throughout the world.
Unrestricted quantitative restrictions would be harmful to the whole world.
Regulated planned economies would, however, help not only the under-developed
and partially developed countries, but also the highly industrialized ones.
Mr. McCARTHY (Australia) considered that quantitative restrictions did
materially reduce international trade in many cases and described the
serious effect of the imposition in 1928/29 by certain countries of such
restrictions on the import of wheat, wool, butter and apples.
Article 20 of the Charter should be studied in connection with other
closely related Articles. The problem of sugar could be solved by an
international agreement, and in that case the provisions of Chapter VI
qualified Article 20. Article 20 should not be deleted and the ITO should
have the power to decide on the merits of each particular case whether
quantitative restrictions might be applied to further economic development.
Mr. PELLAUPESSY (Netherlands) supported Article 20 as at present
drafted. Economic development was of the utmost importance, but it was
already covered by Article 13.
/Mr. BLUSZTAJN (Poland) Page 6
Mr. BLUSZTAJN (Poland) considered that representatives should state
clearly whether they were in favour of supporting a policy of free trade
or whether they accepted the principle of direct state intervention. At
the present time the quantitative restrictions in force in Europe had
expanded the volume of international exchange, although it had reduced it
in the thirties. He supported the suggestion of the representative of
New Zealand that the word "regulations" should replace the word "restriction".
Economic planning implied regulation of production and exchange, and a country
which applied quantitative regulation, while trying to increase its imports
and exports in accordance with its plan for economic development, would be
following the principles of the Charter.
The CHAIRMAN said that the representatives of Argentina, Brazil, Ceylon,
India, Ireland, Italy, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Switzerland, Syria
and the United Kingdom had indicated their wish to speak at the next meeting
of the Committee which would take place on Saturday, 20 December, at 10.30 a.m.
The meeting rose at 1.10 p.m. |
GATT Library | xm256tz5311 | Summary record of the Fourth Meeting : Held at Havana, Wednesday, 3 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, December 3, 1947 | Fifth Committee: Inter-Governmental Commodity Agreements | 03/12/1947 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.4 and E/CONF. 2/C. 5/SR. 1-15 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xm256tz5311 | xm256tz5311_90200085.xml | GATT_155 | 2,881 | 19,327 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE UNRESTRICTED
ON DU E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.4
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 3 December 1947
.
FIFTH COMMITTEE: INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMODITY AGREEMENTS
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FOURTH MEETING
Held at Havana, Wednesday, 3 December 1947 at 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. George HAKIM (Lebanon) -
Continuation of General Discussion of Chapter VI of the Draft Charter
Mr. J. J. DEDMAN (Australia) referred to the fact that the exports of
Australia were largely primary products end gave reasons in support of the
inclusion of a Chapter on inter-governmental agreements within the Charter
of the ITO.
He pointed out that a commodity agreement must be based on practical
operation. International arrangements relating to manufactured goods could
best be dealt with by the generalization of changes generally in customs
duties agreed to under bilateral arrangements. However, the problems of
primary products could be appropriately treated by mutilateral commodity
arrangements. In an agreement covering a single commodity it was possible
to take into consideration the special conditions of the particular commodity
and to deal vith many aspects of International trade in that comm dity.
Prices of primary products had fluctuated so greatly in the past that
periodically various industries were seriously disrupted and at various
times producers and consumers were subject to serious hardahip. In the case
of important primary products the relationship of supply to demand was such
that it was not possible under normal trading method to preserve over a
long period a reasonable return to the grower and a reasonable price to the
consumer. Through international commodity agreements covering the major
primary products it would be possible to bring greater stability to producers
and conesumers alike.
Mr. Dedman considered that importers should have a full voice in the
framing of agreements, but should also accept a full share of responsibility
for their administration. The Draft Charter gave the right to country
substantially interested to remain outside an agreement, but in considering
whetherr it should participate in any agreement for a particular commodity,
such as wheat, a country should take into account the long-term position and
not be influenced only by the present market position of the commodity.
/Chapter VI only E/CONF. 2/C .5/SR. 4
Page 2
Chapter VI only sets out principles under which agreements may be made. It
would be of real value only if agreements are made and made without delay.
Mr. B. N. GAnGULI (India) stated that his Delegation accepted without
reservation the general principles and objectives of inter-governmental
commodity agreements under the provisions of Chapter VI. Through such
agreements national agricultural policies could be reconciled and a stable
basis of international co-operation established. In particular, agreements
designed to prevent the deterioration of the term of trade of the
predominantly agricultural countries would be particularly valuable.
The Indian delegation wished to express second thoughts on the
relationship of the FAO and the proposed ITO and drew attention to the
functions of the Council of the FAO which include:
1. to examine current developments in proposed and existing
inter-governmental agricultural commodity arrangements;
particularly those developments affecting adequacy of food
supply, utilization of food reserves and famine relief, changes
in production or pricing policies, and special food programmes
for under-nourished groups;
2. to promote consistency and integration of agricultural
commodity policies, national and international, with regard
to (a) overall FAO objectives, (b) the inter-relationehip of
production, distribution and consumption and (c) inter-relationships
of agricultural commodities; and
3. to initiate and authorize group to study and investigate
agricultural commodity situations which are becoming critical,
and to propose appropriate action, 1,º necessary, under
Article I (2.f) of the FAO Constitution.
These covered practically all functions relating to agricultural
commodities and were co-extensive with the proposed functions of the ITO
with regard to these communities. In order that the Charter of the ITO
should not in any way restrict the activities of the FAO he suggested
specific modifications to Articles 58 and 64 (see document E/CONF.2/ll/Add.27).
To resolve differences between ITO and FAO provision may be made in the
Charter for a suitable Co-ordinating Committee consisting of a chairman
nominated by the Economic and Social Council and two members representing
ITO and FAO respectively.
He also referred to Article 84 (Chapter VII) which he thought should
also empower ITO to affect a transfer of function to any other competent
inter-governmental organizations.
/Mr. MANSOUR (Egypt) E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.4
Page 3
Mr. MANSOUR (Egypt) stated that although Chapter VI represented a fair
balance between the points of view of producing and consuming countries, he
had certain amendments to put forward to Articles 56 and 62. The implication
contained in Article 56 was that only countries whose interest represented
a substantial part of world production or consumption of a particular
commodity could request the convening of an inter-governmental conference.
He would submit, at a later date, a form of words clarifying the Article
on this point. In Article 62, he suggested the substitution of four years
for five.
The Chairman informed the meeting that the representative of the
International Co-operative Alliance bad requested an opportunity to make
a statement. Reference was made to the Rules regarding participation by
Non-Governmental Organizations. The Meeting agreed that the representative
should be heard, but also decided to draw the attention of the General
Committee to the desirability of setting up at an early date an ad hoc
Committee which would enable Non-Governmantal Organizations to make an -
effective contribution to the work of the Conference.
Mr. THORSTEN ODHE (International Co-optirative Allianc) stated that
although hie organization was generally pleased with Chapter VI -there was
a fear that the control agreement provision might encourage monopolies to
the detriment of small producers. He therefore made the following suggestions
which his organization felt would further reduce this risk:
(a) to insert a provision for the previous investigation of
monopolistic combinations before commodity agreements were made;
(b) to insert, in addition to Article 84 paragraph 3, specific
provisions in Chapter VI for consultation with ICA and other
non-governmental organization in Category A in study group,
commodity conferences and councils;
(c) a provision to be made to make it obligatory for exporter
to sell to all buyers willing to pay the market price and meet
other term of trade, thus to prevent discrimination.
Mr. LING (China) announced that his delegation had made no reservations
concerning Chapter VI during the Geneva discussione and had no new proposals
to put forverd new.
Mr. KUNTER (Turkey) agreed in general with the principles of Chapter VI
but felt that more precision could be given to certain of its conditions. He
suggested the inclussion of a list of the outstanding primary commodities
in Article 53 (1). In Article 55 (3) he suggested the insertion of a time
limit vith respect to the length of study group investigations. He was not
/in flavour of E/CONF. 2/C. 5/SR. 4 page 4
Iin favour of full publicity being given to inter-governmental commodity
agreements until after their conclusion for it might give rise to speculation.
Article 61 (8) needad further clarification so that it would be understood
that expenses should be relsted to the interest of the country in the
Mr. PARGA (Colombia) felt that Article 59 clearly implied that inter
governmental commodity. agreements would only be negotiated in exceptional
circumstances. It also seemed that considerable time would be needed for
preliminary study before an agreement could be concluded. Those, and other
conditions, as of apeculation which had been
mentioned by the Turkish representative, would have a detrimental effect on
producing countries... .
In his opinion, countries producing primary commodities should not be
impded from combining together so that their producers would not suffer
through speculative practices. His delegation would submit an amendment
to that effect at.a later date. . . .
Mr. MUNOZ (Chile), in reply. to the Turkish representative, explained
that Article 53 (1) had been the subject of much discussion during the
London and Geneva meetings. It was not practicable to list all the primary
commodities and for this reason the definition in paragraph 1 had been agreed.
Mr. VOCLIOLO (Italy) announced that he agreed with the principles of
Chapter VI and that he had no proposals to put forward to the substance of
it. He reseryed the right, however, to submit a formal amendment to the
phraseology of Article 53,. .. .......................... .
Mr. PETER (France), in connection with the remarks of the representatives
of India, agreed that the problem. of the relationship between ITO and FAO
was a difficult one. Article 58 provided that inter-governmental commodity
control agreements could only be initiated by ITQ, .and with that principle
Mr. Peter agreed.., Should. such agreements be negotiated by organizations
other than ITO the principles and objectives of the latter Organization
might not be observed. The formal relationship between the two organizations
would have to be drawn up in conformity with Article 84, and that. Article
was in no way contradictory to the constitution of the FAO...
The Indian representative had also mentioned the need for a.,
co-ordinating committee. A preliminary Interim Co-ordinating Committee
concerning inter-governmental, commodity agreements was already in existence
and FAO was participating in its work. . . -. - . - .. .
In reply to the respresentative of Egypt, Mr. Peter explained that it
was for each, country to decide, if it were. directly concerned with a
/particular E/CONF.2/C.5/SR. 4
Page 5
particular commodity and in that connection any country' s request to
participate in the work of the conference would be granted. As regards the
Egyptian representative's proposal concerning Article 62, Mr. Peter expressed
the view that a period of five years would make for greater flexibility.
In regard to the remarks of the Turkish representative Article 61 (8),
he mentioned that the contributions to the expenses of the Tin study group
were based on the proportional interests of the countries concerned. In
connection with the suggested time limit for the work of the study groups,
he expressed the view that that should be left to their discretion.
The Preparatory Committee had decided. to give full publicity to
inter-governmental commodity agreements and at the same time, to avoid.
speculation, had agreed that both importers and exporters should be present.
Mr. MARTINEZ LACARRA (Mexico) reserved his right to present certain
amendments at a later date. As the Charter was now drafted, the countries
producing primary commodities would find themselves faced with a highly
controlled market, while, at the same time, they would be forced to buy
manufactured goods in a free market.
Mr. PAPATSONIS (Greece) fully endorsed the suggestion of the Turkish
representative to include a list of primary commodities in Article 53 (1).
Mr. USHANI (Pakistan) wished for a further explanation as to why no
list of primary commodities had been included in Article 53 (1). He also
wished to know the exact meaning off the words "efficient producer" in
Article 54 (c). Would it be possible, for example, to draw a distinction
between a wheat producer in Canada and one in Australia, or a cotton producer
in Pakistan and one in Egypt.
Mr. CHANEZ (Peru) stated that he proposed to submit an amendment regarding
the question as to whether countries taking part in a study group or commodity
conference should be obliged to relinquish any unilateral measures taken with
respect to the commodity.
Mr. CAPLAN (United Kingdom) expressed the hope that delegations would
put forward any amendments as soon as possible and suggested that careful
study be given to the explanatory document issued by the Secretariat
(document E/CONF.2/C.5/1).
Appointment of Drefting Sub-Committee
The CHAIRMAN referred to the recommendation of the General Committee
regarding explanatory notes to the Charter (document E/CONF.2/BUR.5). He
proposed the establishment of a Drating Sub-Committee to undertake the
preparation of, any text for the consideration of the Committee, including
drafting changes which would incorporate the sense of the explanatory notes
into the text of the Articles.
/After some E/CONC.2/C.5/SR.4
Page 6
Aftor some discussion of the timing of the work of such a sub-committee
it was decided that the work on any particular Article would be done after
the Committee had discussed that Article. The following were appointed as
Members of the Drafting Sub-Committee: .
Argentina India
Australia' Netherlands
Colombia United Kingdom
France United States
Article 52
The SECRETARY commenced the first reading of Article 52 and footnote
(see Annotated Agenda, document E/CONF.2/C.5/3). France, supported by
the United. States, suggested withdrawal of the footnote. There were no
objections and this was considered agreed. As there were no further comments,
Article 52 vas adopted on the first reading..
General Statement by IFAP
At this stage Mr. CAIRNS (Representative of International Federation of
Agricultural Producers) was given permission to make a statement. .Mr. Cairns
said he appreciated the opportunity of making a few general observations on
behalf of the IFAP before his departure for Washington for the meeting of
the Internatioral Wheat Council. The IFAP comprised the representatives
of the organized farmers of twenty countries and hoped. soon to include ;
representatives of farmers in many more countries. He congratulated the
Preparatory Committee on their achievement in putting before this Conference
a comprehensive and agreed draft Chapter on commodity agreements. The
Federation had been formally established at the Hague in May 1947. At that
Conference, a resolution had been unanimously adopted. supporting strongly
the proposed. international wheat agreement, and regretting that such an
agreement had not been concluded at the recent International Wheat Conference
in London.
Mr. Cairns emphasized the importance attached by the IFAP to the
all--important role which the FAO must play in all agreements on agricultural
products. The Federation appreciated the explicit recognition given to the
functions, and the initiative expected, of the FAO, in Article 64. of Chapter VI
of the Draft Charter. However, the Federation still held firmly to the
conviction that the role envisaged for the FAO in the Draft Charter was
Insufficient. The FAO was the first of the United Nations specialized agencies
to be established and its constitution charged it with far-reaching
responsibilities regarding agricultural production, nutrition, the welfare
of agricultural producers, and international commodity agreement
/He hoped E/CONF.2/C.5/SR.4
Page 7
He hoped that a decision would be made to establish the present Interim
Co-ordinating Committee for International Commodity Arrangements on a permanent
basis, Effective collaboration between the FAO and the ITO would be essential,
Mr. Cairns expressed disappointment at what he considered. to be insufficient
recognition in the Draft Charter of the constructive and expansive role which
commodity agreements could play ln regard to a number of commodities of which
the world was now in sore need. He illustrated his point with a reference to
wheat. The Draft Charter clearly indicated that the draft heat agreement
would be a so-called, control agreement, and set forth pretty stringent
conditions to which all such agreements must conform. Yet there was an
excellent case for a wheat agreement even if it were proved that fears of
an eventual surplus of wheat were not well founded. In order to expand and
maintain production of wheat and certain other basic agricultural commodities,
producers must be assured of reasonable prices for a period of some year.
Such assurance could best be provided within multilateral inter-governmsntal
commodity agreements.
Article 53
Article 53, paragraph 1 and the proposed amendment by the delegation of
Chile (document E/CONF.2/ll/Add.30) were read.
Mr. MINOZ (Chile) proposed that in the first line the word. "Chapter"
should. be replaced by "Charter" so that there would be uniformity in the
definition of "primary products" throughout the Charter. The Committee Wás
in General agreement as to the desirability of a uniform definition but
thought that the matter should be considered by a general Drafting Committee
concerned with the whole Charter which might consult other Committees
concerned with Articles using the term "primary products".
Article 53, paragraphs 2 and 3 were read and some discussion took place
as ta whether it was desirable to clarify the present text. Article 53 was
approved on the first reading, on the understanding that the question of
the uniformity of definition of the term "primary products" would. be
considered. by the appropriate general committee.
Article 54
The Preamble and the amendment proposed. by the Chilean delegation were
read. and considered. The delegate of Chile explained. that his proposal to
change the word "may" to "shall" in the preamble was designed to give
greater force and dlignity to the Chapter. After some discusion. it was agreed
that the word. "shall" was not acceptable but it was decided to ask the
Drafting Sub-Coamittee to attempt to find a compromise wording.
Article 54, paragraph (a) - read and approved.
/Article 54, Page 8
Article 54, paragraph (b) - approved after discussion reading the
meaning of the words "shift of resources are manpower".
Article 54, paragraph (c) - discuaslon ensued, regarding the use of
efficient producers". There was some objection to the retention of this
phrase and the delegate of Cuba state that he would propose an amendment
for later discussion.
Article 54, paregraph (d) (e) and (f), were approved after comment by
the delegate for the Netherlands that Article 54 was mostly positive and that
the sequence of paragraphe has no intended significance.
The CHAIRMAN declared the text of Article 54 approved at first readling
except for the preamble and peragraph (a).
The meeting rose at 7.30 p.m. |
GATT Library | yj921kk9752 | Summary Record of the Fourth Meeting : Held at Lake Success, New York 23 January 1947 at 10:30 a.m | United Nations Economic and Social Council, January 24, 1947 | United Nations. Economic and Social Council and Preparatory Commission of the Conference on Trade and Employment Drafting Committee | 24/01/1947 | official documents | E/PC/T/C.6/13 and E/PC/T/C.6/1-20 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/yj921kk9752 | yj921kk9752_90230042.xml | GATT_155 | 1,492 | 9,770 | United Nations Nations Unies
ECONOMIC CONSEIL E/PC/T/C.6/13
AND ECONOMIQUE 24 January 1947
SOCIAL COUNCIL ET SOCIAL ORGINAL: ENGLISH
CONFEREMCE ON TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FOURTH MEETING
Held at Lake Succees, New York 23 January 1947 at 10:30 a.m.
Examination of Article 24 - Reduction of Tariffs and Elimination-
of Preferences
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) proposed. that the phrase"or termination''
be inserted after the word "modification" in sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph
(1) and that the words "and no margins of preference shall be increased" be
added at the end of sub-paragraph (b) of the same paragraph.'
Messrs. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM), SMIT (CANADA) and.PHILLIPS (AUSTRLIA)
stated. that at first sight they saw no objection to these amendments, but they
reserved the right to comment upon them further at a later stage.
Mr. ADARKAR (INDIA) suggested that the word "substantial'' in paragraph
(1) should be deleted because some countries might not be in a position to
reduce tariffs substantially and therefore the phrase "substantial reduction
of tariffs'' as unrealistic.
Mr. SHACKLE (KINGDOM ) pointed out that the word. -"substantial
reduction'of tariffs" merely set a target for the tariff negotilations and
that there were adequate safeguards in paragraph (3) of Article 24 and. in
other places in the Charter for countries with low tariffs. therefore he
opposed the deletion of the word substantial''.
After Mesers. BENDA (CZECHOSLOVAKIA) Lopez FRESQUET (CUBA) and.
.LECUYER (FRAMCE) had supported. Mr. Shackle. Mr. Adarkar withdrew his
proposal.
Mr. ADARKAR (INDIA) suggested. that the following words be substituted
/for sub-paragraph E/PC/T/C.6/13
Page 2
for subparagraph (b) of paragraph (1) "Margins of preference on any product
shall in no case be increased and. no new preferences shall be introduced.."
He.pointed out- hat this suggestion embodied the reservation which the
Indian delegation on had made at the First Session of the Preparatory" Committee.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) said that he was prepared to accept
Mr. Adarkar's proposal, out only as an additional sub-paragraph to paragraph
(1). Mr. Adarkar's proposal resulted from. objection to the word
"automatically'' in sub- paragraph (b) and. the use of this. word. had.been
discussed at great length in London.
Mr. BREBNER (NEW ZEALAND) stated that he supported Mr. Adarkar's
objection to the use of the word. "automatically" and. Mr. MORETON (AUSTRALIA):
said. that he wished to maintain the reservation which the Australian,
delegation had. made at the First Session. of the Preparatory .Committee,
The CHAIRMAN remarked that the great majority of the Committee apparentl.
favoured. the retention of sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph (1).as it was
drafted. at the First 4 Session. However, it would. be noted .in the report of
.the Drafting Committee that three delegations maintained :the reservations
.they had made at the First Session.
Mr.ADARKAR (INDIA). asked that his proposal be recorded by the. Drafting
.Committee as an alternative draft of sub-paragraph (b); of paragraph (1)
Messrs. MORETON (AUSTRALIA) and. BREBNER-(NEW ZEALAND) supported this request,
Mr. LEDDY(UNITED STATES) stated that at the first Session in London,
India, South Africa and New Zealand had made reservations on sub-paragraph
(b). However, the Delegation of Australia had not opposed this
sub.paragraph, although that delegation had. said. that they considered it
would not operate to produce mutually advantageous negotiations.
Mr.. Leddy went on to say that the proposal made by Mr. Adarkar now went
beyond the reservation the Delegation of India had entered in london.
Mr. ADARKAR (INDIA) defended his proposas by pointing out that
sub-paragraph (b) could only be read. in the light of the preceding parts
of paragraph (1). It was not the intention of the Delegation of India
/to suggest E/PC/T/C.6/13
Page 3.
to suggest that margins of preference should not be decreased.
The CHAIRMAN suggested that Mr. Adarkar's proposal that his
amendment should be referred to the Second Session of. the Preparatory
Committee by the Drafting Committee as an alternative text should be -
referred to the Legal and Drafting Sub-Committee. This was agreed,
The .CHAIRMAN asked Mr. Lopez FRESQUET (CUBA) whether the Delegation
of Cuba maintained the reservation which was set out on page 10 of the
Report of the First Session. Mr. Lopez Fresquet replied that after
consideration his government had decided to withdraw this reservation.
.Paragraph (2) of Article 24 of the Charter wae accepted without
change.
Mr. TORRES (BRAZIL) suggested that the phrase "and particularly with
regard to Members legitimate need for protection" should be inserted in
paragraph ('-) after the phrase "having regard to the provisions of the
Charter as a whole". Mr. Torres argued that the addition of these words
was clearly compatible with the spirit of the Charter and- of the Article
and that this would make the Article more explicit. He thought that there
were two approaches to the problem of reduction of trade barriers - a negative
approach as embodied in Article 24 and a positive approach which was the
development of economic resources in Member countries. He suggested the
insertion of these words so as to show that Members had both these approaches
equally in mind.
-This proposal was supported by Mr. ALVAREZ (CHIIE).
Mr. SMITH (CANADA) said that the additional words might hava a -kh
wider effect than was probably. intended by Mr. Torres. It was conceivable
that highly industrialized countries Iight consider they had a legitimate
need for protection.
Mr. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM) considered that the reference in
paragaph (3) to the provisions of the Charter as a whole reflected the
/balance E/PC/T/C.6/13
Page 4
balance which had. been struck. in the document between industrially developed
countries and. industrially undeveloped countries. He thought that the
addition of the, words in question might tend. to upset this balance.:
Mr. Lopez FRESQUET (BRAZIL) stated that he preferred the paragraph
as it was drafted it the First Session and. Messrs. JUSSLANT (BELGIUM-
LUXEMBOURG), ADARKAR( INDIA) and BREBNER (NEW ZEALAND) adopted. a similar
position.
Mr. NAUDE (SOUTH AFRICA) feared that adoption of Mr. Torres' proposal
would tend to upset the balance in the Charter which had been reached
after much discussion in London. If so, he thought that this proposal
amounted- to a change in substance such as the Drafting Committee had no
power to consider.
After further discussion Mr. Torres agreed that his proposal should
not be discussed furthers but both he and. Mr. ALVAREZ (CHILE) reserved
their positions.
Mr. ALVARBEZ (CHILE) pointed out that at the First Session in London
the Delegation of Chile had asked for a definition of the phrase "without
sufficient justification" in paragraph (3). He thought the Drafting
Committee might consider defining this phrase.
Mr. LEDDY (UNITED STATES) replied that the First Seassion of the
Preparatory Committee had-considered. that it would be impossible to
prescribe a definition of this phrase and. that the matter would. have to
be left to the Organization, having regard to. the- provisions of the Charter
as a whole.
Mr. ALVAREZ (CUILE) accepted Mr. Leddy's explanation. It was agreed.
that the- point should be mentioned. in the Drafting Committee's report.
Paragraph (3) was then accepted as drafted at the First Session in
London.
Mr. SHACKLE (UNITED KINGDOM) stated that Article 24 should take account
of the situation that a Member which had consolidated its tariffs pursuant
/to negotiations E/PC/T/C . 6/13
Page 5
to negotiations might later alter. its method of tariff valuation or its
tariff classification. In such cases he thought that affected Members
should be able to ask for re-negotiation. Accordingly he proposed that
the following paragraph be added to Article 24:
"If any Member Country which has negotiated a consolidation of.
any of its tariff rates in pursuance of this Article should,
at any time while such consolidation remains in effect, alter
its method of tariff valuation or its tariff classification in
such a way as to increase -the duty payable upon any product
which, at the time of negotiation of the tariff consolidation,
was understood to be covered thereby, then the other Member or
Members at those request such consolidation was negotiated,
shall be entitled to call for further negotiations forthwish
with a view to reaching a satisfactory adjustment of the matter;
and the Member which has altered its methods of valuation or
its tariff classification shall enter into such further
negotiations as requested.
The CHAIRMAN said that Mr. Shackle's proposal would be circulated and
would be considered at a later date.
It was agreed that the Delegates for France and Canada should be
appointed additional members of the Administrative Sub-Committee.
Mr. BENDA (CZECHOSLOVAKIA) asked for a definition of the phrase
"within a reasonable period of time" in paragraph (3) of Article 24.
The CHAIRMAN replied that at first sight he thought estimation
of this period of time rested with a complaining Member,
Mr. LEDDY (UITED STATES) stated that he thought the period of time
would depend upon the circumstances of the country against whom it was
proposed to bring a complaint.
It was agreed that the next meeting of the Drafting Committee should
be held at 10:30 a.m. on 24 January 1947. |