Organization for European Economic Cooperation: European Payments Union

1955 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 306-306
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
German Federal Republic ◽  
European Economic ◽  
First Time ◽  
Of Greece

Monthly statements issued by EPU during the period March 1954–December 1954 indicated that the German Federal Republic retained its position as chief creditor; United Kingdom monthly surpluses, while considerable, were less consistent than those of Germany. France showed a surplus for the month of July 1954, for the first time since June 1952, and by December 1954, had a cumulative surplus since June 30, 1954, of 6.7 million units of account. Settlements with France under the rule that gold paid by France would be recoverable to the extent that it had a net surplus for the period after June 30, 1954, reduced the amount of gold paid by France for deficits beyond its quota to 351.3 million units of account. Surpluses and deficits of other member countries were settled half in gold and half in credit, with the exception of Greece and Turkey, whose balances were settled in gold. As a result of EPU's December operations, its total of gold and convertible assets declined by 5.6 million units, to 422.9 million units.

Organization for European Economic Cooperation

1955 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 304-305
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
Trade Liberalization ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
German Federal Republic ◽  
Special Position ◽  
European Economic ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Future

Council: The Council of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) met on May 5 and 6, 1954, and agreed on the basis of a compromise settlement of the extreme creditor and debtor problem in the European Payments Union (EPU). The settlement provided that 1) accumulated debts should be paid over a period of time; 2) debtors should in the future limit to a minimum their resort to EPU resources; 3) the rules of payment should remain unaltered; 4) if the German Federal Republic or other creditors increased their surpluses in EPU, they should extend further credit, but receive some compensation from the EPU dollar reserve; and 5) the special position of Germany should be dealt with. According to press reports, the settlement had averted the danger that the United Kingdom and Germany would withdraw from EPU. The Council, which also decided that EPU should be renewed for another year after June 30, 1954, referred the matter of further details of the settlement to the managing board of EPU. Other actions taken by the Council during its May meeting included the following: 1) recommendations to France that it abolish the compensatory taxes on imports which it had introduced along with certain measures of trade liberalization, and increase trade liberalization to 75 percent by November 1, 1954, instead of to the 65 percent which it had promised; 2) recommendations to the steering board that it submit, as soon as possible, “concrete proposals” for the abolition of artificial measures designed to aid exporters; and 3) the establishment of a ministerial group to examine the problems which would arise if a “number of countries” re-established convertibility.

Organization for European Economic Cooperation: European Payments Union

1956 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 659-659
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
German Federal Republic ◽  
European Economic ◽  
The United Kingdom

Settlements in EPU for the period May through July 1956 showed the German Federal Republic retaining the strongest creditor position. Austria, which showed a small surplus in June, had a larger one in July, while Italy moved from a substantial deficit in June to a surplus in July. France continued to have the largest monthly deficit; second was the United Kingdom, which showed a surplus in May, a deficit in June and a significantly larger deficit in July. Since December 1955, France had covered its deficits fully in gold payments, but in July 1956 it resorted to the 25 percent EPU credit to which it was entitled. Belgium and Luxembourg retained strong creditor positions.

International Sugar Council

1953 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 302-303
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
German Federal Republic ◽  
Major Question ◽  
The World ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Favor Asking ◽  
Marketing Methods

A meeting of a committee of the International Sugar Council was scheduled to open in London, September 29, 1952. The major question to be considered by the committee was the distribution of the world's sugar supply, in particular, the surplus accumulated in Cuba as a result of a record harvest. Many members of the organization were said to feel that a general reassessment of the marketing methods of sugar was needed in view of changed conditions of production. Some delegates were reported to favor asking the United Nations to convene a world sugar conference; it was pointed out that the principal obstacle to successful distribution of the world sugar supply was the lack of international convertibility of currencies. France, Belgium, Netherlands, United Kingdom, German Federal Republic, Peru, Haiti, Cuba, United States, and Indonesia were expected to send delegates to the meeting while observers were expected from Brazil, Mexico, Poland and Czechoslovakia.

Organization For European Economic Cooperation

1950 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 520-528
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Executive Committee ◽  
Foreign Minister ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
New Members ◽  
European Economic ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Consultative Group

Council of OEECOn April 4, 1950, the Council of OEEC held its annual election. Dr. Dirk U. Stikker, Foreign Minister of the Netherlands and political conciliator of OEEC, was elected chairman of the Council, thus combining the functions of those two OEEC offices. Representatives of Austria and Switzerland were elected as vicechairmen of the Council, while new members of the executive committee of OEEC were Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and the United Kingdom; the United Kingdom retained the presidency of this committee and France the vice-presidency and Turkey replaced Switzerland as rapporteur géndral. The Council also decided to do away with the consultative group of eleven which had proved to be unwieldy and to eliminate the practice by which the chairman and vice-chairmen had been expected to spend two days of every week in Paris. It was decided that: 1) the full Council should meet at the ministerial level on the first Friday of every second month; 2) whenever circumstances demanded, the executive committee could be convened at the ministerial level, with the participation of the chairman of the Council and possibly at his call; 3) the chairman was empowered to ask the vice-chairmen to meet with him in Paris at any time to review progress or to discuss action. In response to a request from the Council of Europe, the Council of OEEC appointed a subcommittee of three members to meet with a similar subcommittee from the Council of Europe to discuss closer cooperation. Sweden and Italy were named to the OEEC subcommittee with a third member to be announced later.

Organization for European Economic Cooperation

1956 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 658-659
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
Flexible Exchange Rate ◽  
German Government ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Bilateral Agreements ◽  
Exchange Value ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
United Kingdom Government ◽  
Tariff Reductions

Council The Council of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC), meeting in Paris on June 29, 1956, decided to maintain the European Payments Union (EPU) for another year beginning on July 1, 1956, without any modifications in its rules. The Council also approved bilateral agreements on repayment and liquidation concluded by some EPU members. The Council met again in Paris from July 17 to 19, under the chairmanship of Mr. Harold Macmillan (United Kingdom); among the major questions discussed were nuclear energy and trade liberalization. Prior to the meeting, press reports indicated that the United Kingdom had refused an invitation from the west German government to discuss a flexible exchange rate for sterling, stating that the United Kingdom government saw no useful purpose to be served in an international discussion of the exchange value of sterling. During the Council session the ministers had before them a report and proposal dealing with 1) the need for the OEEC countries to achieve a degree of free trade abolishing quantitative restrictions to the extent of 90 percent or more; 2) the possibility of consolidating that degree of liberalization; and 3) the desire of the low tariff countries in Europe to see this quantitative liberalization accompanied by tariff reductions.

Relief and Rehabilitation Organizations: Committee of European Economic Cooperation

1948 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 158-160
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
Harvard University ◽  
Joint Conference ◽  
European Economic ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Soviet Union

On June 5, 1947, the Secretary of State of the United States, George C. Marshall, stated that the United States could not proceed much further with its plans to assist European recovery unless the countries themselves reached some agreement as to their requirements and to their own contribution to European recovery. Immediately following this speech at Harvard University, representatives of the United Kingdom, France and the Soviet Union met in Paris to discuss the possibility of a joint conference on the problem. After the Soviet representative (Molotov) withdrew, sixteen nations, upon the invitation of France and the United Kingdom, met in Paris from July 12 to September 22, 1947, to draw up a joint program for European reconstruction. Participating countries were: United Kingdom, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey.

Text of note from the Allied High Commissioners for Germany (France, United Kingdom, United States) to the Chancellor of the German Federal Republic (Adenauer) on the proposals for holding free elections in all Germany. Released to the press October 15, 1951.

1951 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 865-866
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
German Federal Republic ◽  
The Press ◽  
Direct Elections

In your letter of October 4, you repeated proposals made by the Federal Government March 22 and September 14, 1950, and March 9, 1951, for the holding of free general, equal, secret and direct elections in the whole of Germany.

Convention for European Economic Cooperation, Signed at Paris, April 16, 1948

1948 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 420-426 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
European Economic ◽  
The United Kingdom

The Governments of Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, the Netherlands, Portugal, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey and the Commanders in Chief of the French, United Kingdom and United States Zones of Occupation of Germany

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document