was set forth in paragraph 3 of section IV of the report, which reads as follows:

"To insure effective consultation on matters in which organizations have special competence or knowledge, it is recommended that those included in category (a) may be invited by the Council to consult with a committee appointed for that purpose, if the Council so desires or the organization specifically requests such consultation. Their representatives should be able to participate fully in any hearings of this kind so that the committee may report to the Council on the basis of a full exchange of views. Similar arrangements may be made for organizations in category (b) for consultation with a committee on matters within the particular fields of activity with which they are concerned. Organizations in category (c) may be invited by the Council for consultation with a committee."

It was furthermore provided that, in general, arrangements for consultation with the commissions of the Council should be similar to those suggested for consultation with the Council itself. Consultation should normally be with a committee of the commission appointed for the purpose. Organizations in category (b) with comparatively limited fields of interest would normally be linked for consultation purposes with the particular commission or commissions concerned with their fields of interest.

Finally, the Committee recommended that the World Federation of Trade Unions, the International Cooperative Alliance, and the American Federation of Labor should all be accorded the privileges extended to organizations in category (a).

DISCUSSION BY THE COUNCIL

When the report of the Committee was submitted to the Economic and Social Council on June 7 it met with opposition. The Representative of France opposed the report on the ground that it had not assigned the World Federation of Trade Unions a place commensurate with its importance. This point of view was supported by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the Ukraine, and several of the countries of eastern Europe. Reference was made to a letter from Mr. Sidney Hillman, of June 4, 1946, who on behalf of the World Federation of Trade Unions requested the right of an authorized representative of the Federation to attend all sessions, whether public or executive, of the Council, its commissions, and committees and to present the view of the Federation, in both oral and written form, before the full membership of the Council or its appropriate commission or committee, on any matter under discussion by them.

The Representative of the United Kingdom took issue with this view,

but on the ground that no non-governmental organization should be accorded a place on the Council stronger than that of one of the United Nations not a member of the Council. The United States Representative concurred in this view, but at the same time offered a number of suggestions designed to establish a closer relationship with the organizations in category (a) and by implication, with the WFTU, than was provided in the report. After three hours of discussion in the Council the report was referred back to the Committee for amendment.

RECONSIDERATION BY THE COMMITTEE

Two meetings of the Committee proved necessary to arrive at a second draft of its report. The Soviet Representative submitted amendments designed to favor the WFTU as the one organization which was to enjoy special privileges amounting to full participation in the work of the Council, short of the right to vote. However, the Committee eventually favored the American and French proposals which, while going less far, enhanced the position of the organizations in category (a).

In brief, the Committee adopted the following major amendments to its original report:

1. The original draft provided that the aims and purposes of the organizations to be brought into relationship "should be in conformity with the spirit, purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations." Following a Soviet proposal, the further stipulation was accepted that "organizations proved to be discredited by past collaboration in Fascist activities shall not, for the present, be admitted." 2. Also in line with a Soviet proposal, the Committee considered that "most close consultative connection should be established with the World Federation of Trade Unions which has already applied to the Economic and Social Council with a request to establish connections". The United States and the United Kingdom Representatives in the Council accepted this statement on the understanding that it simply means that the WFTU would be granted the maximum rights provided for organizations in category (a).

3. A United States amendment was accepted according to which written communications from organizations in category (a) will automatically be transmitted by the Secretariat to all members of the Council.

4. The United States proposed another amendment accepted by the Committee under which organizations in category (a) may upon invitation of the Council or on their own request appear, not before an ad hoc committee of the Council as originally suggested, but before a standing committee, appointed for the purpose, which will make for

recommendation of the standing committee, the Council as a whole may receive representatives of organizations in category (a) for the purpose of hearing their views.

5. To insure effective consultation with commissions on matters in which organizations have special competence or knowledge, a United States proposal was agreed to that consultation with organizations in category (a) should normally be with the full commissions instead of through committees of the commissions.

6. A section on "General Arrangements" was strengthened to emphasize the importance of organizing the International Secretariat in such a way "as to render all appropriate assistance to non-governmental organizations and offer to them all appropriate facilities".

APPROVAL BY THE COUNCIL

In its final meetings on June 21, the Economic and Social Council approved the report of its Committee which, nevertheless, gave rise to several hours of additional discussion during which the Representatives of the U.S.S.R. and the Ukraine repeated their previous arguments in favor of special treatment for the World Federation of Trade Unions: that the Federation should not be treated in the same way as the other organizations in category (a) but should be given the right to participate in meetings of the Council without vote. It was also urged by these representatives that the terms labor, business and management, farmers, and consumers, used in describing organizations in category (a), should be stricken from the report. These proposals were lost by votes of 5 to 12 and 6 to 8, respectively. The final vote, approving the report and recognizing the World Federation of Trade Unions, the International Cooperative Alliance, and the American Federation of Labor as organizations in category (a), was unanimous. The Representatives of the Soviet Union and the Ukraine, however, reserved the right of raising again the questions of the position of the World Federation of Trade Unions at an appropriate time in the future, possibly the next meeting of the General Assembly.

After the report had been approved, the Representative of the United States introduced a resolution designed to bring the International Chamber of Commerce into consultative relationship with the Council as one of the organizations in category (a). He urged that action be taken immediately on the application of the International Chamber of Commerce, which had been transmitted to the SecretaryGeneral on January 7, 1946. Because of questions raised by two members of the Council, the United States Representative withdrew his resolution on the understanding that the matter would become the first order of business of the Council NGO Committee.

France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States to membership on the Council NGO Committee, a United States amendment raising the number of members elected to the Committee from the original four to five having been previously accepted.

CONCLUSION

Thus ended the discussion of one of the most controversial issues before the Council, the origins of which go back to the early days of the San Francisco Conference, when the problem was first raised. It is one of the major achievements of the Second Session of the Council to have laid solid foundations for close and fruitful cooperation between the Council and a wide range of non-governmental organizations which look to the Economic and Social Council for leadership in the establishment of improved economic and social relations.

VI. The Reports of the Commissions

Composition

COMMON PROBLEMS

In their reports the various nuclear commissions made differing recommendations as to their definitive compositions. These recommendations were, with one exception, generally acceptable to the United States, which has taken the position from the outset that commission members should, as a general rule, be individual experts rather than representatives of governments. While only the Statistical Commission made recommendations wholly in line with United States policy, on the other hand, only the Temporary Social Commission made recommendations which were inconsistent with these viewsrecommending a membership composed largely of the representatives of chosen governments. The nuclear commissions had also recommended that their subcommissions should be composed of individual experts. Should the permanent commissions be made up of government representatives, advice from technical experts having no governmental ties would thus be available in the subcommissions.

In view of the discussions which developed on this question of composition during consideration of all the commission's reports, the Council appointed a special Joint Committee on the Composition of Commissions to study the matter.

The Soviet member of the Joint Committee argued strongly in favor of government representatives on all commissions and subcommissions, suggesting that otherwise the commissions would be mere "discussion clubs" and that governments would be far less likely to put the recommendations of unattached individuals, however expert, into effect. The United Kingdom, Chinese, and French members argued for mixed membership on commissions. The United States member pointed out that considerations of a political nature would be the concern of the Council itself and the General Assembly, whereas the commissions and subcommissions were small bodies which had to consider the interests of the whole world and should be in a position to contribute expert and technical knowledge and experience.

After considerable debate, the Committee decided by an 11 to 5 vote to recommend to the Council that all the members of all the commissions should be the representatives of the governments of Members of the United Nations chosen by the Council. This recommendation