(extracts)

MOST IMMEDIATE SECRET

Assembly 124.

Committee 3. Refugees.

1. General debate continued today with shorter and more
constructive speeches. The following countries participated:

Poland, United States, Canada, Egypt, Brazil, Belgium and
Australia.

[matter omitted]

7. The Australian Delegate limited his remarks to the primary
question whether or not a case for specialised agency, as distinct
from Commission of E.S.C., had been made out. He quoted the
remarks of the Chairman of the Australian delegation in the
Plenary Session regarding specialised agencies [1], and referred
to public statements by the Secretary-General and some other
delegations along the same lines. While admitting special interest
in refugee problem of countries of origin, like U.S.S.R., Poland
and Yugoslavia, and also of countries like United States and
United Kingdom who might have to bear largest financial burdens,
he stressed the responsibility of all United Nations gathered in
General Assembly to scrutinize carefully all recommendations made
by E.S.C. Australia had demonstrated its interest in relief
problems and established its good faith-
(a) Through its 2 contributions to U.N.R.R.A., and,
(b) By reason of the 7,000 refugees admitted to Australia after
the Evian Conference [2] and subsequent grant of 4,000 permits to
relatives.

The Australian Delegation did not wish to minimize the importance
or urgency of the problem but was raising for the Committee's
consideration the practical question of the best method of solving
it. No satisfactory proof had yet been given in the discussion
that the only efficient way to deal with the problem was to set up
a new, complicated and costly, specialised agency. The onus of
proof lay upon those countries supporting creation of specialised
agency. At present, therefore, the Australian Government must
fully reserve its position in regard to membership of I.R.O. and
obligations incidental thereto.