Creation of a mixed working group on orange groves – UNCCP 94th Meeting (Lausanne) – Summary Record

UNITED NATIONS CONCILIATION COMMISSION FOR PALESTINE

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE NINETY-FOURTH MEETING

The CHAIRMAN thanked the members of the Technical Committee on Refugees for the report (Com.Tech./9) which they had drawn up, which would be duly transmitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. That report would be most useful to the work of the Commission and had been read by its members with great interest.

The report would also serve as a basis for the studies to be undertaken by the proposed Economic Survey Group, part of whose work would cover the same ground as that of the Technical Committee. He therefore asked the members of the Technical Committee whether they had any suggestions to offer regarding measures to be taken as a result of their investigations. Moreover the Commission would appreciate the Technical Committee’s advice on the urgent measures of conservation which should be taken, particularly with regard to the orange groves, during the period of time which would necessarily elapse before the Economic Survey Group began its work in the field. The Committee might perhaps discuss the question with the Principal Secretary.

Mr. ZORLU said that, in view of the fact that the nature of the Chairman’s statement came as a surprise to the Technical Committee, he would request the Commission to grant members of the Technical Committee time to consider their reply, especially as it would appear that since it was being charged with such extensive functions, the Economic Survey Group would in a sense be superseding the Technical Committee.

The Technical Committee would of course be at the Commission’s disposal to give any further explanations or comment which might be called for in connection with its report.

Mr. ROCKWELL wished to inform the Technical Committee that he had suggested to Mr. Porter before his departure that efforts should be made to find funds in the United States, perhaps from private sources or from petroleum companies, for the Mussa Bey Alami project. Mr. Porter had agreed to do so and had taken the Technical Committee's report with him for further study.

Mr. LUCAS suggested that since the measures recommended in the Technical Committee’s report would be partly within the competence of the Commission and partly within that of the proposed Mixed Working Group, it might in the circumstances be advisable to prepare, in agreement with the Principal Secretary, two separate papers.

The CHAIRMAN agreed to that procedure.

The Technical Committee then withdrew.

Creation of a mixed working group on Arab orange groves (Com.Gen.SR.37)

The CHAIRMAN invited the Chairman of the General Committee to comment upon the draft terms of reference drawn up for the proposed mixed working group.

Mr. de L.A. TOUR DU PIN (Chairman, General Committee) pointed out that the terms of reference which were based on a draft prepared by the Secretariat in consultation with the Technical Committee had deliberately been made very precise and limited in scope, in accordance with the desire of the Arabs that the problem should be dealt with urgently and quickly. He suggested that it might be desirable for the Commission to make known its strong position on the matter to the Israeli delegation even before the return of Mr. Shiloah; it was possible that the latter might be led to modify his reply.

Mr. de la Tour du Pin recalled that he himself, while concurring in the adoption of the text, had had certain doubts concerning the word “communicated”, in subparagraph (2) of the mandate, which he had thought it necessary to bring to the attention of the Committee.

The CHAIRMAN pointed out that no measures could be taken without the agreement of the Israeli Government, and that in any case that agreement was specifically provided for in the draft. He proposed the deletion of the last words, “and communicated to the Government of Israel”, from sub-paragraph (2). He also suggested that the General Committee should discuss the matter with the Israeli delegation in the afternoons before the return of Mr. Shiloah, stating that the Commission considered it essential to have the agreement of the Israeli Government on the matter, and that if such agreement were withheld the Commission might find it necessary to make known the fact that it had endeavoured to promote measures of conservation and had failed.

In reply to a question from Mr. de la Tour du Pin, the CHAIRMAN noted the Commission’s agreement that the Arab delegations and subsequently the refugee organisations, should be informed of the whole matter after the Israeli reply had been received.

Replies to Memorandum of 15 August 15, 1949

The CHAIRMAN noted that the Arab reply to the Commission’s Memorandum of 15 August contained an indication that the Arab delegations were ready to receive suggestions from the Commission. He suggested that the Commission’s work would be greatly facilitated if the Israeli reply contained the same indications and that the Israeli delegation might be advised to that effect in private talks. He suggested, therefore, that the meeting with the Israeli delegation should be postponed until Thursday.