London Embassy Files: Lot 59 F59: File 830 Marshall Plan: Telegram
The United States Special Representative in Europe (Harriman) to the Embassy in the United Kingdom
613. Sent Department Repto 24, repeated London 613, for Hoffman repeated London for Douglas and Finletter. Douglas, Finletter and I [Page 465] lunched with Cripps and several members of his staff July 3. Cripps discussed several aspects programming problems. I said I considered our talk informal and pointed out most questions he raised should come through OEEC.
Cripps principal concerns were those already expressed about overstraining OEEC and participating countries governmental personnel with continued series of too detailed programs, interfering with other constructive work on intra-European cooperation. Important specific points made by Cripps were:
- (a)
- Countries should be given dollar figure of loans to be granted them by ECA. I replied ECA prepared to do so per Torep 4.1 Cripps’ statement should be considered as formal request. This info, for UK so suggest it be given Finletter soonest.
- (b)
- Annual allocations once made should be firm, otherwise countries would not know where they stood for internal programming. (5% of total funds might be kept unallocated to cover contingencies), lie explained UK shortest program period was six months and despite greatest effort last fall to change program, results of change were just showing now because time lag on contracts, etc. Hence successive drastic changes in annual program at time quarterly programs made up would not be easy.
- (c)
- There should be little or no quarterly programming by OEEC. These should be settled ECA Washington with individual countries conforming to agreed upon annual program.
On Items (b) and (c) I explained ECA’s views. Cripps appeared ready to concede with reservation that annual program should be considered basic and quarterly reviews should only deal with unforeseen changes in situation. I told him that was general concept but each quarter’s program required real review to keep overall European program flexible and to take account developments and European potentialities. Please comment. I feel it vital that OEEC review program quarterly, but do feel too much detailed quarterly programming will totally bog down OEEC.
- (d)
- Cripps said four year program will be enormous task and no useful program could be completed by mid-November, a deadline British understood has been given by Washington. Cripps felt that OEEC, also struggling with this and next year’s annual programs and quarterly programs, would need until end of December to work out program of any validity at all. I told him I would ask Washington decision on target date, but explained it essential we have best four year program possible in time to present next Congress. Inform us latest date four year program wanted from OEEC.
- Not found in Department of State files.↩