« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »
Résumé of Work by Commissions
COMMISSION I: MONEY AND AGRICULTURE
Commission I considered the proposals coming within Section I of the agenda, as follows: 1. Review of the recommendations of the United Nations Monetary
and Financial Conference held in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire,
Development; its significance for agricultural development
in the Americas. (6) International stabilization of the monetary system. 2. Agricultural credit: (a) Organization and development of credit for agricultural,
livestock, and forestry industries. (6) Establishment of an inter-American agricultural and livestock
credit fund. Dr. Luis Tamayo, Minister of National Economy of Colombia, was designated Chairman of the Commission which received a total of 12 documents, as follows: Document
22 Argentina—"Credit to Agricultural Specialists"
for Agricultural Protection”
provement of Living Conditions” 88 Brazil—"The Work of the Agricultural Credit System of
Brazil” 89 Peru—“Money Stabilization and International Trade” 106 Ecuador—"Inter-American Bank for Colonization": 130 Panama—"Farm Credit Interest Rates"
139 Mexico— "Study and Background of Inter-American
Economic Cooperation Regarding Credit”
215 Mexico—"Permanent Committee on Agricultural Credit” Members of the American Delegation assigned to Commission I were H. R. Tolley, and Homer J. Henney, as delegates, Mr. Henney being designated reporting delegate. Advisers were S. S. McCloskey, H. Gerald Smith, and John C. Cady, adviser-secretary. Because of their assignment to other commissions, Messrs. Tolley and Smith were unable to attend the meetings of Commission I.
At the first meeting of Commission I, July 26, two subcommissions were named, the first to consider subjects under "Money and Agriculture”, and the second, “Agricultural Credit”. Subcommission 1 was composed of the delegates from Bolivia, Cuba, Mexico, United States, and Venezuela. Dr. Jesus Maria Herrera Mendoza, delegate of Venezuela, was designated chairman of Subcommission 1, composed of the delegates from Argentina, Ecuador, Guatemala, Peru, and Uruguay. Dr. Julian Murguia, delegate of Uruguay, was designated chairman of Subcommission 2.
The action taken on the resolutions was as follows:
RESOLUTION 22: CREDIT TO AGRICULTURAL SPECIALISTS
It was proposed that arrangements be made to grant automatically financial credit to those who were receiving technical education in agriculture, such credit to be increased as training advanced. Subcommission 2 modified the proposal, recommending that measures be taken to provide special credit facilities to graduates of agricultural schools to enable them to gain access to farming or stock-raising. The resolution was so approved. The United States representatives proposed insertion of the word "worthy” before "graduates”, but as finally adopted, it was assumed that the word "credit” itself implies worthiness.
This was the only resolution which occasioned any difficulty in reaching agreement within Commission I. As originally proposed by the Venezuelan delegation, it recommended that the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development assume the functions of providing adequate agricultural credit to the American republics, in
lieu of the organization of the institutions recommended by the First and Second Inter-American Conferences on Agriculture. It was also proposed to petition the International Bank, when established, to set up a department for such purposes. However, the Mexican delegate, Dr. Pascual Gutiérrez Roldán, put forth a vigorous effort to have the resolution amended to provide for an inter-American agricultural credit bank to serve as originally intended or as an intermediary between the national banks of each country and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Dr. Gutiérrez Roldán, considered by many other delegations as an authority on this subject, because of his work at the Second Conference as well as interim activity toward the establishment of adequate agricultural credit facilities, had won strong support for his amendment. Therefore, it was necessary to effect a compromise whereby the original recommendation would hold and efforts to create an inter-American agricultural credit institution would not be made unless the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development could not assume the functions contemplated by the recommendations along this line of the First and Second Inter-American Conferences on Agriculture.
RESOLUTION 68: MONETARY STABILIZATION AND EXCHANGE
RATES FOR AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION (VENEZUELA)
This resolution was not considered contrary to the principles of the Bretton Woods agreement. However, as a matter of information it was referred to Commission IV which was considering resolutions concerning international trade. That Commission noted no objections. Because of the broad scope of the resolution, however, Commission I called it to the attention of the Resolutions Commission, where, in view of the adoption of Resolution V in Commission II, it underwent some modification in phraseology. The recommendations of the original resolution read:
“1. To express the necessity that, in case the international monetary fund is approved, the said organization shall, in applying the provisions of Articles VIII (3) and XIV (4) of its draft constitution, keep well in mind, as is contemplated in the said draft, the special agricultural conditions in the countries of America, which, for the purpose of maintaining their basic agricultural production and without any aim of international competition, may have established rates of exchange for agricultural protection prior to the holding of the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference, so that neither the domestic economic stability of the said countries nor their international trade may be seriously affected;
“2. That the American nations, as a means of avoiding basic inequalities in their payment balances which would nullify their efforts for monetary stabilization, cooperate among themselves in order to assure favorable prices and sure markets for their agricultural products by availing themselves of multilateral agreements or any other adequate instruments;
"3. That, if the said international monetary fund should come to be set up, the Pan American Union transmit to it the text of the present resolution.”
As modified by the Resolutions Commission, the final recommendations became:
“1. To recommend that, in case the international monetary fund is approved, the said organization shall, in applying the provisions of Articles VIII (3) and XIV (4) of its draft constitution, take especially into account the special agricultural conditions in the countries of America which, for the purpose of maintaining their basic agricultural production and without any aim of international competition, may have established rates of exchange for agricultural protection prior to the holding of the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference, so that neither the domestic economic stability of the said countries nor their international trade may be seriously affected;
“2. That the American nations, as a means of avoiding basic inequalities in their payment balances which would nullify their efforts for monetary stabilization, take advantage of every opportunity to cooperate in order to assure favorable prices and safe markets for their agricultural products by availing themselves of multilateral agreements or any other adequate instruments; in accordance with the basic principles expressed in Resolution V of Commission II;
“3. That the Pan American Union transmit the text of the present resolution to the Inter-American Conference of Monetary Experts about to be held and to the International Monetary Fund when the latter is created.”
RESOLUTION 69: PRICES OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS AND
IMPROVEMENT OF LIVING CONDITIONS (VENEZUELA) This resolution was not considered within the scope of Commission I and accordingly was referred to Commission IV. RESOLUTION 88: THE WORK OF THE AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
SYSTEM OF BRAZIL (BRAZIL) This was submitted as a rather elaborate study and not as a resolution. Copies were distributed for the information of the delegates. No action was taken thereon by the Commission, as no recommendations were contained in the paper.
RESOLUTION 89: MONEY STABILIZATION AND INTERNATIONAL
TRADE (PERU) This study was not considered within the scope of Commission I and accordingly was referred for consideration by Commission IV. RESOLUTION 106: INTER-AMERICAN BANK FOR COLONIZATION
(ECUADOR) Commission V originally received this resolution and, upon approving the first recommendation pertaining to the organization of a committee on colonization within the Pan American Union, referred to Commission I the second recommendation that there be created an Inter-American Bank for Colonization. The views of the United States representatives that it would be untimely, because of the proposed International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, to recommend the establishment of another bank, appeared to meet with unanimous approval. The author of this resolution proposed that it be withdrawn and stated further that the Ecuadoran Delegation would consider it quite satisfactory to express in the minutes of the meeting of the Commission the hope that the financing of colonization projects might be within the scope of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. RESOLUTION 130: FARM CREDIT INTEREST RATES (PANAMA)
As originally presented, this resolution recommended that all farm loans made by both public and private agencies bear a maximum interest rate of 3 percent. This was modified to recommend the granting of loans by public agencies at the lowest possible rates permitted by economic conditions of each country, and was so approved. RESOLUTION 139: STUDY AND BACKGROUND OF INTER
AMERICAN ECONOMIC COOPERATION REGARDING CREDIT
(MEXICO) Since this study contained conclusions rather than proposals, the chairman of the Commission proposed that the delegate of Mexico present these conclusions in the regular form for presentation of resolutions as established in the rules of procedure for the Conference. This was later done by the Mexican delegate in Document 215 subsequently discussed. RESOLUTION 147: EXCHANGING INFORMATION ON AGRI
CULTURAL CREDIT SYSTEMS (BOLIVIA) This resolution was merged with a similar, but more specific, resolution presented by Mexico. See Resolution 215 below. RESOLUTION 200: CREDIT FOR FERTILIZERS (CHILE)
The recommendation that good financial credit for fertilizers be established to facilitate and stimulate the interest of farmers in the