Mr. Chairman, we believe that if the court's opinion is in the affirmative, then the United Nations will have improved its prospect for insisting upon the payment of assessments for the United Nations emergency force and for the Congo force, and for taking action against the defaulters. But it has not been considered practical to invoke article 19 which, as the Leader of the Opposition has mentioned, concerns the suspension of voting rights in the assembly, in the absence of an authoritative opinion on the legal obligation, in view of the actual response of members to the financial assessments levied for the emergency force and for the Congo force.
The court's opinion is to be rendered in time for the 17th session of the assembly,
which will begin about the middle of September. If that decision is favourable, then I think there would be much better ground for taking action against defaulters; but in the meantime there is nothing practical that can be done to deal with the question of the nations which are in default.
Payments are made from time to time, and in some cases nations simply are not able to pay. We do not quarrel with their failure at all. But it is in the case of the nations who can pay and will not pay where the blame is due. As the Leader of the Opposition has said, the communist countries will not pay anything either for the United Nations emergency force or for the operations in the Congo, and some other countries-some of our best friends- will not pay anything for the Congo operations. The question of expelling members of the United Nations or depriving them of the vote for failure to pay is a rather complicated one. There is some doubt as to the effectiveness of the working of the organization as a whole if action of that kind was taken.
Subtopic: DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS