A.—2

38

(b) Solutions of international, economic, social, cultural, health, and other related problems; and (c) Universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, language, religion, or sex." The report stated that the phrase " high and stable levels of employment " in subparagraph (b) had been accepted in preference to the phrase " full employment" by a vote of six to five. On presentation to the full Committee it was promptly moved by the New Zealand delegate that the phrase " full employment" be adopted. The New Zealand motion brought strong support from Australia, the Netherlands, Ukraine, Belgium, Yugoslavia, Mexico, U.S.S.R., and France, and on being put to the vote was carried without dissent —indeed, with evident enthusiasm. At a later meeting, however, the United States delegate asked the Committee to reconsider the statement of purposes already approved and to adopt instead an alternative draft involving a rewording of subparagraphs (a) and (b) as follows: — (a) Solutions of international economic, social, health, and other related problems, including those relating to the attainment of higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and racial progress and development. (b) Cultural and educational co-operation. The United States, while not objecting to the use of the phrase " full employment," argued that the context in which it appeared was capable of being misinterpreted as obligating the international organization to interfere in the domestic affairs of member States. One of the main purposes of the suggested change was to dispel fears which might arise when the Charter came up for Congressional ratification. Although it appeared reluctant to reopen a matter on which a unanimous decision had been reached, the Committee, on the motion of the New Zealand delegate, finally agreed to do so, out of courtesy to the United States. In the further debate which followed New Zealand joined with Australia in a strenuous defence of retention of the text as agreed to with " full employment" stated as a specific purpose towards the promotion of which member nations pledge themselves to take all possible action internationally as well as nationally. In this they had the full support, among others, of France, Belgium, Tndia, the U.S.S.R., and the United Kingdom. The New Zealand delegate stated further that the Economic and Social Council could only succeed if it had the co-operation of Governments; they must agree to co-operate fully, freely, and voluntarily in achieving the purposes set out. "Twice in our life-time millions of young men had been given the right to die. Were we now going to deny them the right to live?" he asked. For the average man and his family the right to live depended on the right lb work. It was therefore the responsibility of Governments represented at San Francisco not merely to promise full employment, but to pledge themselves to ensure its being made a reality, since, without full employment, fundamental human freedoms were without value or meaning. After a vigorous discussion, in which the great majority of those taking part came out strongly in favour of an explicit reference to the promotion of full employment, the United States withdrew its alternative proposal, subject to the Committee's agreeing that nothing contained in Chapter IX of the Charter could be construed as giving authority to the Organization to intervene in the domestic affairs of member States. The United States proposal to include a specific reference to " educational co-operation " as a purpose of the Organization was warmly supported. The view of the New Zealand delegation,, which seemed to be generally shared, was that education in itself represents such an important field of international co-operation as to warrant separate and special mention in the Charter. The appropriate paragraph was accordingly referred back to the sub-committee