RULES OF PROCEDURE

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 66, Issue 304, 5 October 1946, Page 5

RULES OF PROCEDURE

AGREEMENT AMONG BIG FOUR Speeding Up, Peace Conference (N.Z. Press Association—Copyright.) (Received This Day, 9.30 a.m.) LONDON, October 4. The Big Four last night agreed on rules of procedure for speeding up the plenary sessions to ensure that the conference shall finish by October 13, including: * (1) Reports from the conference committee will not be read but distributed. (2) Each delegation will be limited to 30 minutes’ speaking time for each treaty. (3) Amendments mentioned in reports of committees may be voted on but not discussed. No other amendments will be permitted. The rules have been forwarded to the conference secretariat for drafting and will be submitted to the plenary session on October 6 for approval. Reuter’s correspondent says it was also decided that the treaties should be considered by the plenary sessions in the order laid down at Potsdam, namely, Italy, Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Finland, also that three days should be allotted for the Italian treaty a\id one each for the other four. } During the meeting Mr Molotov (Russia) announced that he was going to New York by the Queen Elizabeth on October 16 to attend the United Nations General Assembly.

The decision means that the plenary session will have to crowd into 10 days its examination of the findings of nine committees before reporting back its findings to the Council of Foreign Ministers.

The military committee adopted’by 15 votes to six the military clauses in the Bulgarian Treaty. The eastern bloc voted against adoption. After the committee had rejected the Soviet proposal about Bulgaria’s allowance of motor torpedo-boats. General Slavin (Russia) declared he would refuse to sign the committee’s report on, the military clauses of the Bulgarian Treaty, adding that there would have to be two reports.

The repeated objections raised by General Slavin kept the military committee sitting for nearly 10 hours, which is a record session for the conference. General Slavin, as soon as the session began at 9 a.m. yesterday, raised objections and kept raising them- all day long. Mr A. V. Alexander (Britain) intervened and as a result was involved in frequent exchanges with General Slavin. Mr Alexander, at the close of the debate, observed he was glad that General Slavin accepted the general rules of procedure laid down by the conference. General Slavin retorted: “I am not accepting any of Mr Alexander’s proposals, no matter where he comes from.” . „ r . , Mr Alexander replied: I do not come from anything but. a foreign, democratic country.”

Mr Fedor Gusev (Russia) accused the United States of being generous at the expense of other countries when the Balkan Economic Committee debated the American proposal to reduce Hungary’s reparation payment from £75,000,000 as provided in the draft treaty to £50,000,000. He also attacked Australia, which had declared support for the American proposal for doing so on ‘‘admittedly inadequate information about Hungary’s economic position.” Mr Gusev said that Hungary had accepted the draft treaty’s amount of £75,000,000, payment of which was to be in kind and not foreign exchange. It was right that Hungarian workers should toil at .least as hard as the Russians to make good the damage done. The aim of, the United States was not to help the new democratic Hungary, but the old reactionary Hungary. *

Mr Willard Thorp (United States), in reply, said the Czechoslovakian de legate had assured them that Hungary was trying to collapse to gain their pity, while Mr Gusev Insisted that Hungary was doing beautifully. The American proposal was defeated by seven votes to five, the United States, New Zealand, Canada, Australia and South Africa voting for the amendment, and Britain, France and the Slav States against. The Associated Press correspondent says that Russia will.receive £50,000,000, Yugoslavia £17,500,000, and Czechoslovakia £7,50,000 from Hungary’s £75,0.00,000 reparations.