B PART ONE - Explanatory Memorandum
1
1. In the course of its seventh session (March 1951) the Committee on General Affairs took the view that among those measures calculated to strengthen the unity between Member States of the Council of Europe, the study of which was the essential task allotted to it by the Assembly, a special place should be given to the organisation of debates on problems concerned with world policy of common interest to European countries. Suggestions concerning the questions which might be placed on the Agenda for the forthcoming Session of the Assembly were submitted by the Committee to the Bureau and to the Standing Committee. In the course of its meeting on 7th April, 1951, the Standing Committee decided that it would be inopportune to adopt these suggestions owing to the short duration of the May Session.
2. The Standing Committee also made certain reservations as to the propriety of the Committee on General Affairs taking upon itself responsibility for questions which, in the view of the Standing Committee, had not been explicitly referred to it by the Assembly. The Committee had no desire to get involved a discussion on questions of procedure. It confirmed the attitude adopted by its Chairman, namely that a " study of measures to strengthen the unity of Member States of the Council of Europe " had constituted a permanent feature of its Agenda ever since the 1949 Session, and that it was only natural that the Committee should formulate such proposals as it might deem fit, as the situation developed. It was from this point of view that at its eighth session (23rd-24th April, 1951) your Committee examined the procedure to be adopted in the preparation of Debates on the main problems of world politics and decided to submit to the Assembly precise proposals on the matters to be included in the Agenda for the second part of the Session. These two problems are dealt with in Chapters I and II of this Report; and form the subject of draft Resolution I (Part Two of the Report).
3. The Committee on General Affairs had already undertaken an examination of relations to be established between the Council of Europe and the countries of North America. The Assembly had approved the Committee's first conclusions by adopting Recommendation to be foundin
Doc. 74,1950 (Section I, Para. 1 (iii)). On the proposal of its Bureau the Committee undertook a fresh examination of this question and made certain practical proposals based on measures recommended by the Assembly, which are contained in Chapter III (Resolutions II and III, Part Two).
4. The preparatory work for the eighth session of your Committee was carried out with the close co-operation of M. Bidault, whose assistance and advice were of great, value. M. Bidault also acted as Chairman for this session of the Committee, which was attended by the following members :
5. MM. Georges BIDAULT (France, Chairman), (SchErER, Substitute), ASQUINI (Italy, Substitute for M. TREVES), CROSBIE (Ireland, Substitute for Mr. NORTON), GERSTENMAIER (German Federal Republic), VAN DER GOES VAN NATERS (Netherlands), KAPANI (Turkey), MANDALINCI (Turkey), MOMMER (German Federal Republic), MOUTET (Franco, Substitute for M. MOLLET) MULLER (Saar), VON RECHENBERG (German Federal Republic), DE LA VALLÉE POUSSIN (Belgium, Substitute for M. STRUYE), VIARD (France, Substitute for M. BONNEFOUS), WIS-TRAND (Sweden), and Mlle. KLOMPÉ, Rapporteur.
6. I should like at this juncture to express my deep gratitude to M. Bidault and my appreciation to my collegagues for their kind assistance. I should also like to thank the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe most sincerely for the benefit of his valuable suggestions and wide experience.
2 CHAPTER I - Procedure for the Organisation of Debates on World Politics
Usefulness and scope of such Debates in the Assembly
7. It may be objected that the Assembly has already a sufficiently wide field of action in considering the problems concerned with the relations between the European States themselves— and that there is no point in its undertaking a study of questions of even wider scope concerning which the Assembly has absolutely no power of decision. The Statute of the Council of Europe, nevertheless, emphasises that the object of the Council is to " achieve greater unity among its Members... " above all " by discussion of questions of common concern. " By introducing in the Assembly the question of intervention by the United Nations in Korea (August 1950) and later a Declaration on Peace (November 1950) the Committee of Ministers itself indicated that the provisions of the Statute should be given the widest interpretation.
8. The presence in the Assembly at Strasbourg of many of the most eminent European political figures cannot fail to attract considerable public attention to Debates on important problems connected with world politics and thus to influence effectively the action taken by Governments and national Parliaments. It is only necessary to recall the Debates in August 1950 on the Message of the Committee of Ministers and on Specialised Authorities.
9. The Assembly may call to mind a proposal submitted in November 1950 to the Committee on General Affairs, and thence to the Assembly, concerning the establishment of a " European Ministry for Foreign Affairs " : a closer co-ordination of foreign policies would thus have been achieved at the same time as the progress to be anticipated was realized through the policy of Specialised Authorities. After long discussion the Assembly—and the Committee—decided that this proposal was premature and discarded it. Though the proposal was perhaps presented in too categorical a form, the ideas behind it were certainly shared by numerous Representatives, and the discussions in the Committee on General Affairs bore ample witness to the fact : it is essential for the Assembly to play its part in establishing a common European policy and a common European point of view in respect of contemporary world problems. Although the Assembly lacks direct means of action, the proposed Debates will make a useful contribution to laying the foundations on which closer European unity can be built.
Choice of Subjects to be Debated
10. The Committee considered it might be useful, if only to forestall criticism, to call the attention of the Assembly to a few simple common sense rules. In proposing these rules the Committee in no way seeks to limit the Assembly's freedom of choice, but rather to bring out certain principles which should guide it in making this choice.
10.1 The subjects chosen should be of common interest to all the free countries of Europe, so that the debate may conform to the aims of the Council of Europe and help to reinforce the unity of Europe effectively.
10.2 The Assembly should undertake to debate only a very small number of such subjects each year so that it may maintain the high level of the Debates and the prestige of the Assembly itself.
10.3 Above all, due regard must be paid to the possible value of a particular debate in a given political situation. The Assembly should on each occasion reach practical conclusions expressing a clearly-defined policy. In the national Parliaments the Government is able to supply all necessary information. The Assembly, however, is left to its own resources and cannot usefully tackle problems other than those on which it has reliable and detailed sources of information.
10.4 Unforeseen developments in the international situation at a particularly eventful and unpredictable time, however, may necessitate the holding of an immediate Debate. The Debate held in August 1950 on the urgent topic of the Korean war is a case in point.
11. Various possible subjects for debate are considered in Chapter II (relations with the Soviet Union and its satellites, Far Eastern problems, relations with the countries of North America, etc.). The list given is obviously not exhaustive. It might even be advisable to organize regular Debates at each Session on some of these subjects. The Assembly has so far only dealt with international policy in connection with other questions, more especially that of defence. Your Committee—and this is doubtless the view of numerous other Representatives—wishes the principal world problems to be given broader examination. The study of general problems connected with European unity will, furthermore, in no way suffer. It will, on the contrary, sometimes be made easier. A solution of the political or economic difficulties of our countries must frequently be sought in a framework larger than that of Europe. A greater variety in the subjects to be discussed in the Assembly would therefore be of advantage from every point of view. The Committee trusts that the development of the policy of Specialised Authorities, and notably the Joint Declaration of the six signatory Governments of the Schuman Plan (18th April, 1951), will encourage the Assembly in the next few months to hold a major debate on European policy, similar to that held in August 1949, but doubtless of a less academic nature and leading to practical conclusions.
Preparation of Debates
12. The Committee on General Affairs has considered itself qualified to undertake the preparation of debates on world policy. It felt that the Assembly had confirmed this opinion in rejecting a proposal to set up a Special Committee " for Diplomatic Affairs and Secu-rity. " The Assembly should either itself seleot the problem to be discussed at its forthcoming Session or should allow the choice to be made at the appropriate moment by the Committee on General Affairs. At all events a fair amount of latitude should be left to the Committee to enable it to take the topicality of the problem into due consideration.
13. It is eminently desirable that members of the Committee should express their opinions by submitting preliminary memoranda on the question. An effort would then be made to summarize their comments in a preparatory report whenever this appeared possible, or simply to give an objective account of the various views put forward. It might also be possible for a preliminary Debate to be held in plenary Assembly on a problem of major importance. The Committee would then submit at a later plenary Sitting of the Assembly a carefully-studied and well-considered Report setting forth the conclusions to be drawn from this Debate. This was the procedure employed in August and November 1950 on the question of a European Army. In each of these cases, the Report to the Assembly would comprise :
13.1 A brief summary, containing the requisite factors for an appreciation of the problem, together with the official documents published on the subject;
13.2 An analysis proper of the problem, followed by a conclusion containing one or more Motions according to the extent of agreement reached in committee.
14. The various factors to take into account are summed up in the preamble to Resolution I (cf. Part Two), and in Para, (i), which were both adopted unanimously.
3 CHAPTER II - Questions that might be studied by the Assembly
15. Various suggestions were made during the March and April sessions of the Committee on General Affairs. Those to which the Committee devoted particular attention are enumerated below, together with the conclusions reached..
16. Relations between Member States of the Council of Europe and Spain and Yugoslavia. — Many members of the Committee drew attention to the difficulty of undertaking a study of these questions at the present time. The Assembly has not sufficient information to be able to take a stand on subjects the political aspects of which are closely bound up with purely military and strategic considerations. The Assembly did, moreover, adopt a Resolution with regard to Spain (
Doc. 128,1950), in August last of a general political character.
17. Far Eastern problems. — The situation in the Far East is extremely fluid, and there is no reason to expect that it will be stabilized in the near future. This, however, should not be allowed to prevent a Debate on the subject, which would serve, in particular, to enlighten public opinion on the many-sided nature of a problem of which too little is generally known, and which bears heavily at present on world politics. The Committee therefore felt that this suggestion should be taken up again at a later stage, but came to the conclusion that the material circumstances in which the two halves of the 1951 Session are to be held made it impossible to follow it up for the time being.
18. Relations with overseas territories and countries. — A number of Resolutions have already been adopted by the Assembly as a result of work done by the Sub-Committee on Overseas Territories, which deals with the relations with dependent territories and with independent countries associated with certain European States (
Doc. 74, 1950 of August 1950;
Doc. 125, 1950,
Doc. 126, 1950). It had been intended to make a more detailed examination of the economic aspects of these relations, but the matter was not pursued. The Committee also emphasized the importance of examining the general policy to be pursued towards under-developed countries or territories. Your Committee intends to request its Sub-Committee on Overseas Territories to resume its work in this respect. An exhaustive study of the problems involved will, however, be required before any explicit conclusions can be submitted to the Assembly.
19. Relations between Free Europe and the countries of North America. — This subject was considered in 1950 from the point of view of common defence. Evidence of the solidarity of the free world has already been given in many other fields. Many of the chief economic problems of Europe can, for instance, only be resolved in liaison with North America (cf. also Para. 9 above). Mr. Edelman and several of our colleagues have already tabled a proposal (
Doc. 144, 1950), for the establishment of a ' Joint Atlantic Resources and Purchasing-Board. ' At the same time it is quite natural that more and more importance should be attached to the form to be assumed by the cooperation between Europe and America; the mutual sacrifice of sovereignty to be accepted by each State ; the institutional character of the relations between the European States and those of North America, etc. A full debate on relations between Europe and America would therefore be most useful. It should be jointly prepared by a number of Assembly Committees- i.e. the Committee on General Affairs, the Committee on Economic Questions and the Committee on Social Questions. This would undoubtedly help to strengthen still more the bonds of friendship between our two continents. Your Committee unanimously approved the principle of holding a debate of this nature and proposed that the Assembly should instruct its various appropriate Committees to carry out the necessary work during the interval between Sessions (cf. Part Two, Resolution I, Para, (ii)).
20. Relations between the free world and the Soviet Union and its satellites. —- There was substantial agreement in the Committee as early as its first meeting that it should put forward a request for this matter to be included in the Agenda of the Assembly. It was pointed out that this was a vital question which had formed the subject of a great many debates in national Parliaments, and it would hardly be understandable that the Assembly should make no pronouncement thereon. To decline to hold such a debate would be an admission of weakness and would risk alienating public sympathy from the Assembly's work as being too far removed from realities. On the other hand, certain members feared that such a debate would end only in generalities— in a new " Declaration on Peace and Communist methods ", for instance. Whatever might be the value of such exchanges of view, they might all too easily give rise to public disappointment. The majority of members, however, thought there should be no hesitation in tackling well-defined problems, such as the unification of Germany, the Austrian peace treaty, etc. Certain members made reservations as to the date to be fixed for the Debate, feeling that, in view of present negotiations, it would be premature to hold it even during the second part of the 1951 Session. The Committee rejected, by 10 votes to 1 with 4 abstentions, a proposal that the request for inclusion of this question on the Agenda be temporarily set aside.
21. The Committee had some difficulty in deciding upon a satisfactory title for the Debate. (The text is to be found in Resolution I, para iii). It finally adopted by a majority vote (7 votes to 3, with 5 abstentions) the following wording : " Relations between the free world and totalitarian States. " Certain members would have preferred " Relations between the free world and the Communist world " or " Relations between the free world and the Soviet Union and its satellites, " which does indeed seem to present certain advantages. The whole Article (Para (iii) of Resolution I) was finally adopted unanimously, with I abstention.
22. Should the Assembly agree with its Committee, the Debate on relations with the Soviet Union will take place during the Session in the autumn of 1951. The Committee on General Affairs should prepare this Debate during the interval between Sessions. At the same time, provided the work of the Committees were by then sufficiently advanced, the Assembly would also hold its Debate on relations with the countries of North America, as mentioned above (Para. 17). These various suggestions are bound up with the proposal submitted later in this Report (Chapter III), to the effect that relationships be established between the Assembly and the Parliaments of North America. If this latter proposal is adopted, and the invitation mentioned therein duly extended, observers from the United States and Canada would be attending the October Sessions. Suitable arrangements should therefore be made to permit them to participate in the Debates, the importance of which would thereby be greatly enhanced. Your Committee unanimously adopted this last suggestion (Para, (iv) of Resolution I) which certain of its members very strongly supported.
23. The whole of Resolution I (cf. Part Two) was adopted unanimously, with one abstention.
24. Mention should be made at this juncture of another suggestion put forward in committee —to the effect that the Assembly should at each Session be supplied with an information bulletin giving a general survey of world problems and their European implications. This document would be drawn up by the Secretariat-General according to the directives issued by the Committee on General Affairs. It might possibly form the subject of a general debate, particularly when the Assembly came to decide on its choice of matters concerned with world policy for inclusion on its Agenda.
4 CHAPTER III - Relations between the Consultative Assembly arid the Congress of the United States of America and the Parliament of Canada
25. In the course of its Session in August, 1950 the Assembly adopted, as a result of the Report submitted by the Committee on General Affairs, a Recommendation on relations between the North American and European countries (
Doc. 74, 1950, Ch. I, Para. 1 (iii)). This Recommendation emphasized particularly the need to establish " an organic liaison " between the Council of Europe and the countries of North America. At its session in March, 1951, the Committee of Ministers studied this Recommendation and expressed similar concern. It was of the opinion that the Assembly should " study the terms and conditions of such liaison ". The Committee on General Affairs, to which the preparatory Report of the Senior Officials had been submitted, likewise took the view that such study was desirable.
26. A number of extremely important suggestions concerning this question were made in the course of the Session held in November 1950 by Count Sforza, Chairman-in-Office of the Committee of Ministers. Calling to mind the Recommendation in question and emphasising the interest to be attached to it, Count Sforza added : " Whoi s going to prevent you from establishing bodies, even of an unofficial type, whose task it would be to get into touch with Congress in the United States and the Canadian Parliament... with the object of making the true situation in Europe, its difficulties, its needs and aspirations better known? Who is going to prevent you from suggesting at the same time that these legislative bodies should send, even in a private capacity, representatives to Strasbourg who might have the opportunity of appreciating the firm will of the peoples of Europe to unite their efforts...? " (Sitting of 18th November, 1950.) This idea expressed by Count Sforza was later taken up by our colleague, M. Paul Reynaud, who drew attention in a recent statement to the interest which it had aroused in the United States.
27. Your Committee has studied the suggestions of M. Sforza and, in order to give practical effect to them, it is submitting to the Assembly a " Declaration " which the latter might wish to communicate to the Congress of the United States and to the Parliament of Canada (cf. Part Two, Resolution II). On the occasion of this exchange of views certain members of the Committee expressed regret that a similar approach should not have been made in respect of the Parliaments of South and Central America whose peoples, like those of North America, had profound affinities in respect of origin, culture, and civilization with the peoples of Europe. The Committee deemed it advisable to return later to this proposal, meriting as it did most careful attention. It felt, however, that in present circumstances, the first move should be made in respect of the Parliaments of North America, particularly since the Assembly and the Committee of Ministers had already declared themselves to be in favour of the principle of an " organic liaison " between the Council of Europe and these countries.
4.1 Analysis of the draft Declaration
Part I - General Considerations (Paragraphs 1 to 3 of the draft Declaration)
28. The principles on which the above-mentioned Recommendation (
Doc. 74, 1950) is based are taken up and developed :
28.1 Democratic Europe is deeply grateful to North America for its generous assistance towards economic recovery and towards the maintenance of the security of the free world.
28.2 The progressive strengthening of the unity between the European nations must necessarily lead to a closer collaboration between Europe and America. The reception, at times enthusiastic, accorded to certain developments in Europe such as the Schuman Plan is evidence that this sentiment is shared on the other side of the Atlantic,
28.3 The interests both of free Europe and of America are closely linked. Each has need of the other, but the motives that are at the root of their solidarity lie deeper than a mere community of interest and are derived from a common origin and a common civilisation.
Your Committee unanimously adopted these paragraphs 1-3.
Part II - Relations between the Congress of the United States, the Parliament of Canada and the Assembly (Paras. 4-6 of the draft Declaration).
29. Your Committee attached the greatest possible weight to the establishment of direct relations between the Assembly and the Congress of the United States. In the words of its Chairman, " This is one of the most important measures which the Assembly can take in order to assert its authority and that of the Council of Europe. " Note should here be taken of certain comments expressed during the general discussion. Might not the disparity between the powers of our Consultative Assembly and those of the Parliaments of North America involve a risk of frustrating at the outset any chances of co-operation between these two bodies? In the view of your Committee the Assembly, though merely consultative in character, is, after all, an emanation of the European Parliaments with sufficient authority to act as the medium in establishing relations between all these Parliaments, many of whose leaders meet regularly in Strasbourg.
30. Should not the Assembly make an informal approach to the Parliaments of North America before sending them an official invitation? The Committee felt that only a formal approach, with the backing of the Assembly as a whole, would be in keeping with the dignity of the North American Parliaments and that of the Council of Europe. Any other procedure could be a means of obtaining only individual reactions. The profound sympathy felt by American members of Parliament towards Europe has, moreover, abready been repeatedly demonstrated. One of the most recent tokens of this fact is the proposal of Mr. Kefauver and Mr. Gillette, United States Senators, which has been tabled before the Senate, and has gained the support of a very large number of Senators and Representatives, besides being most favourably received by the Canadian Senate. This proposal runs as follows : " Resolve d by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), that the President is requested to invite the democracies which sponsored the North Atlantic Treaty to name delegates, representing their principal political parties, to meet this year with delegates of the United States in a federal convention to explore how far their peoples, and the peoples of such other democracies as the convention may invite to send delegates, can apply among them, within the framework of the United Nations, the principles of free federal union. " Further reference will be made to this proposal when discussing the suggestion for the creation of a joint parliamentary committee [cf. Para. 32).
31. The Motion submitted by the Committee to the Assembly contemplates two successive stages :
31.1 An invitation to the Congress of the United States and the Parliament of Canada to send observers to the second part of the Session. As mentioned above (Para.20), these observers might be associated with certain Debates. Appropriate arrangements should be studied by the Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges (cf. also Para. 37);.
31.2 A proposal that during the Session these observers should study, together with the qualified organs of the Assembly, the possibility of devising permanent forms of mutual co-operation.
The Committee feels that the Assembly should immediately put forward, as its first working proposal, the suggestion that a " Joint Parliamentary Committee " should be instituted, composed of both European and North Amei'ican parliamentarians. Certain members considered this proposal to be premature, and felt that no mention should be made of it until the North American parliamentarians had actually arrived. The Committee, however,, rejected this objection by 10 votes to 5, the majority viewing the idea of this inter-parliamentary committee as one of great value, on which it would be useful for the North American representatives to be acquainted with the views of their colleagues before their arrival in Strasbourg.
32. The Committee unanimously adopted the proposal for an invitation to the Parliaments of North America, together with the principle of a permanent liaison (Para. 5 of the draft Declaration). It further adopted by 13 votes to 1, with one abstention, the proposals on the joint parliamentary committee contained in Para. 6 of the draft Declaration (cf. Part Two, Resolution II).
33. It had originally been suggested that the proposed liaison committee should be termed " Atlantic Parliamentary Committee. " This suggestion met with the whole-hearted approval of certain members. Others, however, felt it might be confused with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. The question was finally left in abeyance. Care must be taken to avoid any ambiguity on this subject. In the opinion of your Committee the proposed inter-parliamentary committee should in no way cut across the work done by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation or presume to exercise any form of parliamentary control over it. The representatives of the Assembly on the new committee will be the spokesmen of parliamentarians of all Member States of the Council of Europe. A number of these countries are not, for various reasons, signatories of the Atlantic Pact. The committee will therefore deal with the preoccupations common to all these countries, whether economic, social or cultural, in the form in which they find expression in our Assembly. It will, of course, also deal with political problems, among which is that of security, but in your Committee's opinion there is no question of its dealing with military or strategic questions.
34. These considerations should be duly compared with those invoked by Senator Ke-fauver in his proposal mentioned above. According to this proposal (Para. 28), it would be the signatories of the Atlantic Pact who took the initiative. Here, on the other hand, it would be the Council of Europe, the organ representing united Europe, which would take the necessary action. This collective approach on the part of the representatives of the Euro-pean peoples would have great symbolic value. It would mark a fresh phase of development of the idea of European unity and should be favourably received by European public opinion. The function which your Committee proposes to assign to the proposed parliamentary committee is less ambitious, moreover, than that featured in Senator Kefauver's plan. It would first provide opportunities for European and American parliamentarians to exchange infor-nation concerning the situation, the difficulties and the particular problems existing in their respective countries. Such exchanges of information are indispensable. The many exploratory visits to Europe made by American parliamentarians, either alone or as members of delegations, bear witness to the desire to make this direct personal contact—and the same desire is shared by European parliamentarians. The new committee would also make a regular examination of problems of joint interest to Europe and North America (cf. Para. 31). Its conclusions would be communicated to the Parliaments of North America and Europe, and also to the Consultative Assembly.
Part III - Statement with regard to certain contemporary problems (Para. 7 of the draft Declaration)..
35. Your Committee considered that the Assembly should immediately proceed to draw the special attention of the North American parliamentary representatives to two questions of particular importance to Europe :
35.1 The efforts made in Europe to re-arm, which bear witness to the determination of European peoples to resist any form of agression;
35.2 The economic consequences of such re-armament, particularly as regards raw materials. European countries attach great importance to measures taken to ensure proper distribution of raw materials and to avoid inflation (cf. for instance, the Proposal of Mr. Edelman -
Doc. 144, 1950).
36. Your Committee attached considerable importance to this part of the Declaration. It held the view that the Committee on Economic Questions should be consulted as to its drafting, so that the latter might also insert, if it deemed fit, a more explicit reference to the results of its work on the Motion proposed by Mr. Edelman. The Committee further considers that this third part of the Declaration gives extra weight to its political content and furnishes useful indications as to the subjects which the Assembly might wish the parliamentary committee to handle. The Assembly has continually to bear in mind the Preamble and Article 1 of the Statute of the Council of Europe which do not.define a negative attitude—an attitude which would be ours if we were to limit ourselves to being anti-communist. On the contrary, they assign constructive tasks to our Organisation : we are to unite Europe; to foster economic and social progress in European countries, for the " purpose of safeguarding and realising the ideals and principles which are their common heritage. " It is in this same spirit that your Committee would like to see the parliamentary committee approach its task and undertake the study of realistic solutions for the problems of to-day.
37. The draft Declaration as a whole (Part Two, Resolution II) was unanimously adopted by the Committee.
Practical measures- to be adopted
38. Resolution III enumerates a few practical measures to be adopted by the Assembly; these measures require little comment. Your Committee proposes to leave to the Bureau of the Assembly—as is only right—the task of approaching the Parliaments of North America, and of deciding on the arrangements for receiving the observers invited. The Bureau would be assisted by the Committee on General Affairs, should any further study be required. The Committee especially emphasized the importance of the measures to be undertaken if the success of the Assembly's invitation is to be ensured. At the same time as the " Declaration " adopted by the Assembly is formally communicated, it might also be of value to send other documents, on the same subject, to the American Parliaments for information purposes (such as the Official Report of the Assembly Debate on this Declaration). It might also be a good plan to arrange for the President of the Assembly to pay an official visit to the United States and Canada.
39. It would further be necessary to decide on the status of the North American observers during the Assembly Session. A number of Committee members hoped that the latter would be permitted to participate to some extent in the work of the Assembly and its Committees (cf. Para. 20 above). Your Committee considers that the Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges should make an appropriate study of this matter, keeping in touch with the Committee on General Affairs, in view of the political implications of the rules of procedure adopted. Finally, the Committee on General Affairs intends to continue its work on the arrangements for the parliamentary committee in order to help prepare the conversations with the North American representatives.
40. Resolution III (cf. Part Two), which provides for the adoption of certain practical measures, was unanimously adopted.
