Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MOLOTOV’S NEW MOVE

SENSATION IN COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS FURTHER DEBATE DEVELOPS (Rec. 12.50 p.m.) PARIS, August 6. When the rules committee met this afternoon for what was to have b £ en a formal vote on the two-thirds against a simple majority issue, the sitting developed into a new debate on voting procedure. Holland and Brazil had withdrawn their amendments in favour of New Zealand’s for a simple majority on all decisions of substance. The vote was about to be taken. when M. Masaryk (Czechoslovakia) intervened with a proposal for a sub-com-mittee to examine amendments before they came before the committee. Mr. Molotov and Mr. Kardelj (Jugoslavia) supported the proposal. Mr. Byrnes and Sir Hector McNeil opposed it, the former because the committee last night had decided against a sub-committee, and the latter because “it was a good suggestion, coming at a bad time. The committee should adhere to its decision to take a vote on the amendments.;’ ’• The vote was then taken on Ivl. Masaryk’s proposal, resulting in its rejection by 11 to 8. Mr. Molotov immediately proposed that voting on amendments should be decided by a two-thirds majority on the precedent of the San Francisco Conference. This, says Reuter’s correspondent, caused a sensation. It was also greeted with laughter from many delegates, and observers.

Mr. Byrnes pointed out that the two-thirds proposal contradicted the draft rules, which provided that all questions of procedure must be decided by a simple majority. Sir Hector McNeil argued that the committee had already decided on procedure and Mr. Molotov was a party thereto. Consequently his demand for a two-thirds majority was tantamount to a vote of no-confi-dence in the chair.

Dr. Evatt (Australia) combated the San Francisco precedent for a twothirds majority. He said that the San Francisco Conference itself had decided on such a course when it began, but it was not suggested there that the rules procedure could not be adopted by a simple majority.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GEST19460807.2.59

Bibliographic details

Greymouth Evening Star, 7 August 1946, Page 7

Word Count
323

MOLOTOV’S NEW MOVE Greymouth Evening Star, 7 August 1946, Page 7

MOLOTOV’S NEW MOVE Greymouth Evening Star, 7 August 1946, Page 7