5. Part I of the Agenda was dealt with by the Committee of Ministers at sittings on 8th, 9th and 10th August.
6. On item (1) (the admission of new members) the Committee of Ministers decided to invite the Governments of Greece, Turkey and Iceland to join the Council of Europe, their representation in the Assembly being 8, 6 and 3 seats, respectively, and their contributions to the Budget being regulated by the same method of calculation as that employed for fixing those of the existing members. The Greek and Turkish Ministers for Foreign Affairs and delegations to the Consultative Assembly in the event took their places from 9th August onwards, but for constitutional reasons Iceland was not represented (see paragraph 16 below). No member of the Committee of Ministers raised the question of the possible admission of either Germany, Austria or the Saar at that time.
7. On item (2) (a) (rules of procedure for the Committee of Ministers), the Committee approved the draft Rules with the exception of Article 12, concerning the right of the Members of the Committee of Ministers to speak in the Assembly. It was finally agreed first that Ministers could speak in the Assembly on behalf of the Committee of Ministers collectively, secondly, that Ministers should be entitled to intervene individually on any subject on the Assembly's agenda provided that they obtained the consent of the Committee, which would be given by simple majority; and thirdly, that these two proposals should go forward to the Consultative Assembly for their observations in accordance with Article 27 of the Statute.
8. On item (2) (b) (draft rules of procedure for the Consultative Assembly), the Committee agreed to transmit the draft rules of procedure unamended to the Assembly with the suggestion that a joint committee of the Assembly and the Committee of Ministers should discuss those rules which were of common concern to both bodies.
9. On item (2) (c) (draft agenda for the Consultative Assembly), the Com- mittee had before them a list of fourteen items drawn up by the Preparatory Commission. It was finally agreed that this list contained items which, although they might be suggested by the Assembly itself for discussion, should not be listed as items on which the Committee of Ministers requested the opinion of the Assembly under Article 23 (a) (i) of the Statute, and that these should be confined
to-
(a) The rôle of the Council of Europe in the economic field, taking account of
existing international organisations.
(b) The rôle of the Council of Europe in the field of social security.
(c) Methods by which the Council of Europe could develop cultural co-opera-
tion between its Members.
The necessary procedural items should in addition be included.
10. Items (2) (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) and (i) (budget, financial and administrative regulations, staff requirements, agreement on privileges and immunities, agreement with the French Government, and financial contributions) had been considered by the preliminary meeting of the representatives of the Foreign Ministers and sub- stantial agreement had been reached on any amendments which were necessary. It sufficed for the Committee of Ministers formally to approve the documents.
11. On item (3) (appointment of the Secretary General and Deputy Secretary General), the Committee agreed to recommend M. J. C. Paris and Mr. A. S. Halford for each post respectively.
12. On item (4) (report to the Assembly), the Committee approved the terms of a letter from the Chairman to the President of the Consultative Assembly informing him of the decisions of the Committee affecting the Assembly and trans- mitting to him the provisional rules of procedure for the Assembly and the pro- visional agenda for the session. (See Appendix B.)
Subsequent Meetings
1PagThe4 Comfee of Ministers reassembled aFriday, 1266 August, to consider with M. Spaak, who had in the meantime been elected President of the Consultative Assembly, difficulties which had arisen in the Assembly with regard
3
310
to the interpretation of Article 13 of the provisional rules Pagecoquof 6612 the Assembly, which laid down a time limit of three days within which requests from the Assembly to the Committee of Ministers for the inclusion of additional ques- tions on the agenda must be submitted. It was agreed that such requests must reach the Committee by midnight on 13th August, and that if, after this date, the Assembly should decide by a majority of two-thirds to make other proposals con- cerning questions to be added to its agenda, the Committee would give a reply to such proposals within five days from the date of their receipt.
14.
In accordance with the previous decision, and with Part II of its agenda, the Committee reassembled on Saturday, 13th August, to consider the additional items proposed by the Assembly for inclusion on its agenda. These had been transmitted to the Committee by a letter dated 13th August from the Clerk of the Consultative Assembly to the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers. After discussion the agenda proposed by the Assembly was approved. A copy of the Chairman's letter conveying this approval to the Assembly is at Appendix C.
15. At the same meeting it was suggested that some provision should be made to take into account the strong wish expressed in the Assembly that the Committee of Ministers should not be the sole judge of the admission of new members to the Council of Europe. On the Foreign Secretary's proposal, however, this suggestion was not pursued.
16. At the same meeting the Preparatory Commission was formally dissolved, a committee of financial experts was appointed to consider the budget, and note was taken of a communication from the Icelandic Government to the affect that they highly appreciated the friendly invitation to join the Council of Europe and that this would be submitted with a recommendation for acceptance to the Icelandic Parliament later in the year. Finally, it was agreed in principle that the next meeting should be held at the end of October,* it being understood that the Chairman of the Committee should remain in close touch with the President of the Assembly in the meantime, and that, if necessary, he should be present in Strasbourg during the last two days of the Session of the Assembly. In the event he did attend the last two meetings of the Assembly.
III.—Analysis of the Decisions Reached by the Committee of Ministers
17. The Committee of Ministers thus, in their various meetings before and during the first sessions of the Consultative Assembly, approved the formal steps necessary for the establishment of the Council of Europe, settled the immediate question of new admissions and, finally, in consultation with the President of the Assembly, reached agreement on the Assembly's agenda and certain points of its rules of procedure.
18. The conciliatory attitude adopted by the Committee, particularly in approving without amendment the inclusion on the Assembly's agenda of all the items which the Assembly had itself proposed, and the presence of M. Van Zeeland in Strasbourg at the end of the Assembly's session did much to remove the feeling of antagonism between the two bodies which had made itself felt in the early debates in the Assembly.
IV.-Work of the Consultative Assembly
Opening of the Assembly and Election of the Officers
19. On 10th August, M. Herriot, who had been appointed provisional President of the Assembly by the Preparatory Commission, formally opened the Assembly by an inaugural speech in which he traced the history of the idea of European Union and emphasised the importance of the Council of Europe's succeeding where so many earlier efforts had failed. The only point affecting the debates of the Assembly which he mentioned concerned the question of Germany, on which he sounded a note of caution. The meeting was then adjourned in order that further discussions might take place about the candidates for the Presidency of the Assembly.
Page 642 of absequently altered to early November. Page 642 of 662
37682
B 2
4
Page 843 b6August the Assembly unanimously elected fb2 Spaak as President, he being the only candidate put forward. The Assembly then elected four Vice-Presidents: M. de Menthon (France), M. Jacini (Italy), M. Kraft (Denmark) and Lord Layton (United Kingdom). The only other candidates had been Mr. Whiteley and Mr. De Valera, both of whom were out-voted, Mr. Whiteley by the narrow margin of five votes between him and Lord Layton, after an acrimonious argument, initiated by Sir R. Ross on a point of order which the President rejected, continued by Mr. Churchill, and answered by Mr. Morrison, to the effect that a member of His Majesty's Government would not be impartial as between the Assembly and the Committee of Ministers. There can be no doubt that Mr. Whiteley's defeat was due to these interventions by the British Conservatives.
21. On the afternoon of 11th August the Assembly, on the recommendation of the Committee of Ministers, nominated M. Paris and Mr. Halford as Secretary- General and Deputy Secretary-General respectively, after some debate had taken place in which a number of Representatives, including Mr. Norton (Irish Republic) and Mr. Boothby and Mr. Churchill (United Kingdom) pressed for the establishment of a separate Secretariat for the Assembly. The Assembly then adopted its provisional rules of procedure, drawn up by the Preparatory Com- mission, pending their final revision and adoption.
Agenda
22. On the same day, 11th August, the Assembly considered its agenda, consisting of procedural items and the three subjects referred to the Assembly by the Committee of Ministers on the Council's role in the economic, social security and cultural fields. Strong opposition was shown to the article in the provisional rules of procedure which made it necessary for the Assembly to choose and submit to the Committee of Ministers within three days the additional subjects which is wished to place on the Agenda. It was agreed that the President should inform the Committee of Ministers of the strong feelings on this subject held by the Assembly and report further.
23. On 12th August the Assembly approved a report from the President of his consultations with the Committee of Ministers on this subject (see para- graph 13 above) and invited the Bureau to draw up a list of additional items for the agenda for approval by the Assembly and submission to the Committee of Ministers by midnight on 13th August.
24. On 13th August the Assembly considered the report of the Bureau and finally approved the list of additional items for its agenda for submission to the Committee of Ministers that evening.
24.A. On 16th August the Assembly adopted its final agenda as approved by the Committee of Ministers on 13th August (see Appendix C).
General Debate on Political Structure of Europe
25. The Assembly then proceeded to the general debate on any necessary changes in the political structure of Europe to achieve a greater unity between members of the Council of Europe and to make effective European co-operation in the various spheres specified in Article 1 of the Statute. This general debate lasted throughout 16th and 17th August.
26. There were no less than forty-five speakers, divided, very broadly speaking, into three main groups: the out and out Federalists, the functionalists and a third group concerned principally with suggestions for amending the Statute. The first group, surprisingly small, made no secret of their desire for a federal constitution in the near future, although even the most ardent accepted the need for further study of the problem. In the second group there were a number of what may be called "crypto-federalists such as Mr. Boothby and Mr. Macmillan, wishing to see the Committee of Ministers and the Assembly built up into an international executive and legislative body with an international Civil Service; this group did not, however, urge the transfer of specific powers to a federal authority as such. Mr. Churchill stated that he was not committed to a federal solution. The main part of the second group, which comprised the majority of speakers, while paying lip-sergee to the vague conception of European unity georded dontent for the present to press for closer co-operation through existing organisations under the
5
side78616443
eye of the CBaga164f662 The third group, also considerable,
end- urg ments to the Statute to give the Assembly greater freedom, in particular complete liberty to settle its own agenda, the possibility of having at least two sessions a year, and the right to set up standing committees to work between sessions. Several speakers mentioned the importance of avoiding antagonism between the Committee of Ministers and the Assembly, and Mr. Morrison emphasised that progress towards greater unity must be based on the consent of each of the peoples concerned through their Parliaments, no Government being in a position to sign away sovereignty without a mandate from the electorate.
27. In addition to the general discussion of structural changes, the debate ranged over a wide field, including economic co-operation, the admission of Germany and even the partition of Ireland. There seemed to be a general feeling that organisations such as O.E.E.C. were not going fast or far enough and lacked political control. On Germany, the balance of opinion, but probably not a two- thirds majority, seemed to be in favour of her admission as soon as possible, this line being strongly supported by Mr. Churchill and by some other United Kingdom, Scandinavian and Italian representatives. M. Bidault, on the other hand, sup- ported by other French representatives, including M. Mollet (Socialist), argued against her admission until the German Government had proved its good inten- tions and democratic character, and urged that the admission of the Saar should not be postponed until after a decision on Germany. An exchange of recrimina- tions between the representatives of the Irish Republic and Sir Ronald Ross was, not for the first or last time, strongly disapproved by the Assembly.
28. To sum up, there was a unanimous desire on the part of the Assembly to do something to achieve greater unity in Europe, but certainly no unanimity as to what should be done. It was clear, however, that there would be increasing pressure to amend the Statute, particularly as regards the settlement of the Assembly's agenda, and that the various federal solutions had not been thoroughly thought out. To rectify this last point the United Kingdom Labour Party repre- sentatives proposed that a Commission of the Assembly should undertake a full and objective study of all the proposals put forward for a closer political union in Europe.
Constitution of Committees
29. On 18th August the Assembly discussed procedure and the constitution of committees. It was agreed that the normal procedure should be for an item on the agenda to be the subject of a general debate in the Assembly, then to be referred to a committee for a report, and for there then to be a further debate on the report with a view to formulating a resolution. Certain technical subjects could be referred by the Bureau direct to committees. The Assembly set up committees on the following subjects:-
General Affairs.
(2) Economic Questions.
(3) Legal and Administrative Questions. (4) Rules of Procedure and Privileges.
(5) Social Questions.
Cultural and Scientific Questions.
The first three of these Committees consist of twenty-three members and the other three of eighteen members each. In the 23-member Committees France, Italy and the United Kingdom nominate three representatives, Belgium, Greece, the Netherlands, Sweden and Turkey two representatives, and Denmark, the Irish Republic, Luxembourg and Norway one representative. In the 18-member Committees France, Italy and the United Kingdom nominate three representatives and the other members one representative each. A proposal by a French Sengalese representative for the establishment of a Committee to study questions relating to overseas territories was narrowly defeated. The question of substitutes sitting in Committees while the representatives for whom they were acting were in Strasbourg was remitted to the Committee on Rules of Procedure. Nominations to the various committtees were agreed at a subsequent sitting on 22nd August.
General Debate on Human Rights
30.
On 19th August the Assembly had its first general debate on measures for the fulfilmBageft44 declared aim of the Council of Europe
Pingecordarfc6with
6
Apticle of the Statute in regard to the maintenance and further gealisation of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The general view was that members of the Council of Europe offered their people more and better human rights than any other countries, but that in view of the threat of totalitarian encroachment they should take action to prevent any possibility of these rights being whittled away in any country. There was strong support, led by M. Teitgen (France) and Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe, for proposals previously circulated by the European Movement to the effect that a Convention should be signed by all members guaranteeing basic human rights, defined in very general terms, that a Commission and a Court of Human Rights should be set up under this Convention which States or individuals could petition and, finally, that a more detailed schedule of human rights should be drafted to which all members should subscribe. In the debate some speakers also emphasised the need for a definition of economic and social rights as well as political. The problem of European displaced persons was also touched on.
General Debate on Economic Questions
31. On 23rd and 24th August the Assembly held its two-day general debate on the rôle of the Council of Europe in the economic field, taking account, in accordance with Articles 1 (c) and 23 (b) of the Statute, of existing international organisations. The principal speakers on the first day were Mr. Mackay and Mr. Dalton, M. Reynaud (France), Mr. David Eccles, M. van der Kieft (Holland), M. Bonnefous and M. André Philip (France): on the second day, Lord Layton, M. Bertil Ohlin (Sweden), Mr. Lee and Mr. Harold Macmillan. On the diagnosis of Europe's ills there was little disagreement: they were due to the change in Europe's economic position brought about on the one hand by the material destruction of two major wars and the loss of overseas investments, and on the other hand by the fact that the United States had become at once by far the world's greatest producer and the world's greatest creditor nation. Mr. Dalton quoted figures to show that, contrary to much current propaganda, the United Kingdom had the best record of all the countries represented at Strasbourg in increased production and exports as compared with pre-war, and in the increase in the proportion of its dollar imports paid for by its dollar exports. speakers showed that the United States tariff policy ran completely counter to the Americans' constant exhortation to the countries of Europe to sell more goods to the dollar area. MM. Bonnefous and André Philip made specific reference to the problems of the Ruhr, calling for a real international authority, which should deal not only with the Ruhr itself but with European heavy industry as a whole, thus providing a starting-point for a general co-ordination of heavy industry, irrespective of whether industry in each country concerned was conducted on a collectivised or a private enterprise basis. There was a large measure of agree- ment that O.E.E.C. was not succeeding in its primary task of co-ordinating the several economies: as a body of experts" without a political head," in the words of M. Bonnefous, it could not succeed. Finally, a number of speakers took the view that steps must be taken to enable the Council of Europe to represent the interests of Europe as a whole vis-à-vis the United States, and to confer directly with the United States Government.
Procedure and Privilege
Some
32. At the close of the debate on 24th August, Mr. Dalton raised a point of order in connexion with a resolution which had been circulated to the press with a statement that it had been "inspired by the European Movement," and moved that for an outside body to claim that it was inspiring the activities of the Assembly was a breach of privilege. The matter was referred to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
33. On 24th August the Assembly also adopted a revised draft for article 36 of the provisional rules of procedure for the Assembly concerning substitutes, though Mr. Morrison and others warned the Assembly of the dangers to a Parlia- mentary institution of the indiscriminate use of substitutes. This provided that a member prevented from attending a meeting of the Assembly or of a Committee might be replaced by a substitute of the same nationality, or in the case of a Comagiete byofther representative or by a substitagefo his ownationality, provided that the President or the Chairman of the Committee was warned. This
7
318
represented Pagenterafléelaxation of the provisional rules of frotauré.6Sub- sequently, however, the Assembly changed its mind about substitutes and recom- mended their abolition as unparliamentary. (See paragraph 41 below.)
General Debate on Social Security
34. On 26th August the Assembly had its general debate on the rôle of the Council of Europe in the field of social security (including such proposals as a European housing policy and the possibility of granting to individuals employed in other countries than their own the same rights to social benefits as those enjoyed by the nationals of those countries.) This was thinly attended and produced no striking results except an excellent account by Mr. Whiteley of the progress of social security in the United Kingdom and a reminder by M. Serrarens (Nether- lands) that full use should be made of the accumulated experience of the Inter- national Labour Office. Italian speakers referred to the problem of the emigrant worker in connexion with social security.
General Debate on Cultural Co-operation
35. Also on 26th August the Assembly held its general debate on methods by which the Council of Europe can develop cultural co-operation between its members. No point of particular interest was raised and the short debate con- cluded with the reference of various resolutions to the Committee on Cultural and Scientific Questions, which was instructed also to consider an item on the agenda, proposed by Miss Herbison, concerning the closer collaboration in scientific research and technical development between the constituent countries of the Council of Europe and the maximum pooling of material resources and technical man-power for that purpose.
Committee Stage
36. During the week from 28th August to 3rd September the Committees established by the Assembly worked in private on the motions and resolutions which had come forward to them from the general debates in the Assembly or on particular technical items on the Assembly's agenda which had been referred to them direct without prior debate in the Assembly. The Chairman of each Com- mittee informed the press each evening of the day's proceedings. The Committees remained in being until the end of the Assembly's session, since even after preparing their reports for the Assembly they had in some cases to revise them in the light of the Assembly's discussions.
Report of the Economic Committee
37. On 2nd and 3rd September the Assembly considered the report of the Economic Committee. On 5th September the report was approved in its final amended form by 88 votes to 2, with 11 abstentions.
38. The following is a summary of the report as approved :-
I. The Committee of Ministers are requested :
(1) To invite their Governments to intensify the spread of economic information through existing channels, and to provide facilities for the Council of Europe to bring home to the peoples of Europe the peril of their situation and the advantages of uniting their resources;
(2) To take all practical steps to establish a multilateral system of payments, and to restore inter-convertibility of European currencies;
(3) To create machinery for consultation between central banks on credit policy;
(4)—(a) To follow up and extend the work of O.E.E.C. on the liberalisation of inter-European trade, and all studies now being made on the economic relations of Europe and associated overseas territories;
(b) To take preliminary action for the establishment of a European
economic union;
(c) To study the development of production in Member States in
Page 69rder that their import requirements can be met as effigiently.
as possible from their combined resources;
•
❤
Page 647 662 study the possibility of removihassades to me free move-
ment of manpower;
(e) To study the possibility of encouraging investment in Europe
of American and other non-European capital;
To extend and develop a system of guaranteed markets;
6 ad
To call an economic conference to study the above proposals;
(5) To call industrial conferences, representing employers, workers and consumers, as well as governmental services, to make concrete proposals to the Assembly for the organisation of the main manufacturing and agricul- tural industries and the increase of productivity;
(6) To draw up a draft European convention for the control of inter- national cartels.
II. The Committee of Ministers are also requested
(a) To submit to the Consultative Assembly proposals to meet the recom-
mendations above and a report on progress since the last session; (b) After the proposals have been considered, to nominate a delegation from the Council of Europe to negotiate with the United States Govern- ment, or any other Government concerned, regarding modifications in existing agreements and in United States tariff policy.
III. The Assembly further propose :-
(1)-(a) That the Economic Committee may sit in the interval between
sessions;
(b) That it may split into specialised sub-committees;
(c) That the latter may hear evidence from experts on their own
subjects.
(2) The President of the Assembly shall make contact with the Secre- tariat of U.N.O., O.E.E.C. and the Bank for International Settlement, with a view to securing access to their documents, and arranging for their inter- national and national officers to be heard by the Economic Committee if this is desired.
39. The debates were characterised by a feeling, even among some of its authors, that the report was an unrealistic and poor document; in the absence of anything better and in the interests of unanimity, most representatives were, however, prepared, after it had been somewhat improved by amendments, to vote for its adoption. Attempts made in Committee and in the Assembly to discuss the devaluation issue were heavily outvoted, as was a proposal to transform O.E.E.C. into a permanent body under the direct supervision of the Council of Europe. Omissions such as the importance of full-employment and of guaranteed markets were rectified. But it did not prove possible to do very much to bring the report into more manageable form, in spite of the attention drawn by several speakers to its obviously unreal proposals (such as that for a Council of Europe delegation to negotiate with the United States Government) or to those which seemed unnecessary (such as the calling of a new economic conference).
Report of the General Affairs Committee
40. On 5th September the Assembly considered the report of the General Affairs Committee. On 6th September the report was approved in its final amended form by 88 votes to none.
41. The following is a summary of the report as approved:
I.-The General Affairs Committee is instructed to examine and
report on :-
(a) the general position of Member States considered as a whole; (b) the present situation with regard to inter-governmental organisa-
tions;
the various proposals for extended collaboration;
(d) the political and constitutional modifications which (c) above would
entail;
Page 84 federal and other proposals for the future political development of