NEW DRAFT

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 66, Issue 271, 28 August 1946, Page 6

NEW DRAFT

ITALIAN REPARATIONS AUSTRALIAN PROPOSAL (N.Z. Press Association —Copyright.) (Rec. 1.30 p.m.) PARIS, Aug. 27. Mr Molotov headed the Russian delegation when Dr. E. R. Walker (Australia) in the Italian Economic Committee, moved a similar amendment to that which led to the Russian-Australian clash in the Balkans committee. The amendment proposed a com pletely new draft for the article deal' ing with Italian reparations. The draft provided for recognition by Italy of the Russians’ and other countries’ claims, for reparations, but proposed that compensation should be paid only in part in view of Italy’s contribution to the war against Germany. The amendment further provided that the reparations restitution commission should, within six months, determine the amount of reparations, taking into account Italy’s capacity to pay. Dr. Walker proposed that Russia should accept for reparations Italian assets, in Bulgaria, Rumania and Hun' gary at the value fixed by the commission, the balance to be paid to other countries in dollars or sterling or other currencies. Payments should be cal culated as a percentage of Italy s yearly exports and should be spread over at least five years,* but not more than 10 years. Dr. Walker explained that the Australian motion was not intended to favour ex-enemy countries. Australia did not suggest that the Russian claim for £25,000,000 sterling reparations from Italy was too high, but it did not favour the method of payment in kind by bilateral agreement, which was especially inappropriate when there was only one claimant Power. The method would twist the economy of the paying country and ensure a mar ket for many years for certain com modities of the claimant countries. Australia did not favour a division of surplus war material among claimants. She believed the material should hq destroyed. Molotov Replies Mr Molotov, in reply: described the Australian proposals as stereotyped. They were the same for each committee. They were not constructive, and were only likely to cause angi y discussion. , , ~ Mr Molotov declared that Russia had borne greater sacrifices and bad made a greater contribution to the war than Australia. “All the Australian delegation’s actions in the matter are tendentious and biased. This attitude to Russia certainly will not meet with sympathy among the Russian people. The Australian delegation displayed special energy and activity against Russia and nearly drowned the conference in a pile of amendments. This suggests that someone is helping them. Obviously no delegation alone would be able t to prepare so many amendments. The Australian proposals regarding reparations are not made for the sake of the countries paying reparations, but are directed solely against Russia.” Mr . Molotov said that Russia had taken into account the fact that Italy eventually came into the war on the Allied side, and had therefore modified her claims to the minimum figure. “We are rigidly opposed to postponing the fixing of the amount of reparations. If vanquished countries were made to pay reparations only in foreign currency, it would mean that they were tied hand and foot with regard to the prices at which they would have to sell their products. Australia was anxious to force these countries to sell goods to Britain, America and the Dominions at extremely low prices. Those who purchased them would be able to make enormous profits. I am surprised that the Australian delegation speaks Avith such extraordinary boldness and frankness.” The committee adjourned until to'morroiv.