22

The fall list of speakers which follows will indicate how trulywidespread and serious is the attention to what may be called, briefly, international education : Tuesday, 27 September.—M. Georges Bidault (France), Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr (United States), Professor Zerega Fombona (Venezuela), Professor Osorio de Almeida (Brazil), Professor G. Vedovato (Italy), Dr. -J. C. Beaglehole (New Zealand), M. Jamal Farra (Syria), H. E. Proceso E. Sebastian (Philippines). Wednesday, 28 September.—Professor Jean Piaget (Switzerland), Professor Ferdinand Herzik (Czechoslovakia), Mr. U. Ba Lwin (Burma), Mgr. Jean Maroun (Lebanon), Professor Adam Schaff (Poland), Mr. Roberto Ibanez (Uruguay), Professor Frisch (Denmark), Dr. B. Ernst Buschbeck (Austria), Mr. Tara Chand (India). Thursday, 29 September. —Earl Russell (United Kingdom), Rector Siassi (Iran), M. Eugene Gustave Dupreel (Belgium), Professor Alf Sommerfelt (Norway), Professor A. K. Stout (Australia), Dr. Ines Segura Bustamente (Cuba), M. Jacques Rueff (Monaco), Dr. Mei Yi-Chi (China), H. E. Antonio Castro Leal (Mexico). INFORMAL MEETINGS OF REPRESENTATIVES OF NATIONAL COMMISSIONS There were two of these meetings. Professor Marcel Florkin (Belgium) was voted to the chair. Three main topics were discussed : (1) the agenda for the more formal meeting to be held at the fifth session; (2) liaison between National Commissions and UNESCO House ; (3) the distribution of " paper." (1) There was a good deal of discussion of the agenda, and of the exact wording of items to be set down therein, under the heading of Programme Activities of National Commissions. The effect of this discussion was certainly to make the draft agenda look more logical, and so perhaps it was worth while. (2) Liaison.—The discussion here hinged round a Turkish proposal (seconded by Cuba) for a three weeks' meeting of respresentatives of National Commissions in the near future. The New Zealand delegate made the point that though it was relatively easy for some countries to send delegates continually to Paris, it was very difficult for a small country like New Zealand, far away and with a small population. As a result, the financial aspect of the proposal was well discussed. This may not have influenced the gathering much, but there was ample opposition to the Turkish proposal from other quarters. The general feeling was that further visits from secretaries of National Commissions should be encouraged, and that there might be a three-day meeting immediately prior to the