Extracts PARIS, 16 April 1946

INTER-ALLIED REPARATIONS AGENCY SECOND SESSION OF THE ASSEMBLY

Report of the Australian Delegate
The Second Session of the Assembly of the Inter-Allied Reparations
Agency met in Brussels from the 2nd April to the 11th April 1946.

Prior to the Assembly there were also meetings of the committees
on which Australia is represented, beginning on the 25th March.

[matter omitted]

First List of Industrial Plant
17. The first list of industrial plant available for allocation
among the Members of the Agency was distributed, together with
full inventories of plant and equipment concerned. This list
contains items already previously communicated to governments
through diplomatic channels, and the Australian Government had
already indicated its interest in a number of these items. [1]
However, these communications were prior to the establishment of
the Reparations Agency and the allocation of certain of the plant
originally listed to the U.S.S.R. Member Governments of the
Reparations Agency are now required to make firm bids for items on
this first list within 45 days of the date of its communication,
i.e. not later than 25th May 1946. Governments are in no way bound
by the expressions of interest made on a previous occasion through
diplomatic channels.

[matter omitted]

German Merchant Ships
24. Prior to and during the Second Assembly, the Committee on
Shipping established tables of losses and principles of allocation
of German merchant marine. It was agreed that the shares of German
shipping would be based on tonnages lost through enemy action
without distinguishing between German, Italian and Japanese
action. Several countries that had relatively heavy losses in the
war in the Pacific reserved the right to propose a different basis
of allocation for Japanese ships in the event of their becoming
available as reparations. The Assembly completed the allocation of
the two whaling factory ships that were available. The Walther Rau
was allotted to Norway and the Unitas to the United Kingdom.

Although Australia had expressed an interest in the possibility of
obtaining a whaling factory ship, our case was not strong enough
to be pressed since our total shipping losses did not entitle us
to a sufficiently large share of the tonnage available, and
Australia had not lost any whaling factory ships in the course of
the war.

[matter omitted]

Industrial Processes and Patents
26. Several meetings of the Committee appointed to consider
Technical Processes and Patents [2] (subsequently christened the
'Industrial Rights Committee') were held prior to and during the
Second Assembly. Matters raised were of such complexity that a
separate report is being prepared. [3] In general, the Australian
Delegation pressed for a clear distinction to be made between
German technical information, on the one hand; and the exclusive
property rights granted by the state when it grants a patent, on
the other hand. With regard to the former, there appears to be
almost general agreement with the Australian view that technical
information should be made available freely to all members of the
United Nations and that existing German patent rights should not
constitute any barrier to such a policy. Declarations were made to
the Agency regarding the policy of the United Kingdom, United
States and France.

27. The greatest complexities arise in connection with patents
granted in Allied countries before or during the war to Germans,
neutrals, or Allied nationals, with respect to German inventions.

These patents may be regarded, strictly speaking, as German
external assets, subject to the provisions of the Paris Agreement
relating to the disposal of German external assets. However, the
United States Government favours the making of an agreement under
which such patents would be mainly thrown into the public domain.

28. The United Kingdom has stated that the time is ripe for an
expert conference on such matters and the Assembly of the
Reparations Agency passed a resolution requesting that a
conference be called at an early date. There was some division of
opinion as to whether the Reparations Agency itself would be a
suitable authority to organise such a conference, and the balance
of opinion seemed to be opposed to the Agency assuming its
responsibility. The Australian Delegation took the view that it
was within the competency of the Agency to draw the attention of
the governments to problems affecting patents which arise
incidentally from the allocation of plant or the treatment of
external assets, but that our agreement to any detailed
consideration of these matters by the Agency itself would require
further instructions from the Australian Government.

[matter omitted]

E. RONALD WALKER
Delegate