CONFIDENTIAL
HONG KONG TELNO
639 TO FCO -3-
6.
IT IS ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO SAY AFTERWARDS, PARTICULARLY IF
ONE WAS NOT THERE, THAT ONE THINKS SUCH TALKS COULD HAVE BEEN
HANDLED BETTER, BUT ONLY THE MAN ON THE SPOT CAN JUDGE THE
SITUATION HE FACES, JORDAN JUDGED THAT IT WAS NECESSARY, TO
AVOID PRECIPITATE ACTION BY THE CANADIANS AND IN THE LIGHT OF
DS
THE PRESSURE ON THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT TO CHANGE THEIR POLICY TOWARB
STANS, THAT SOME INDICATION OF WILLINGNESS TO MEET THEIR POINT
OF VIEW SHOULD BE GIVEN. HE HAD EMPHASISED THAT HE HAD NO AUTHORITY
TO NEGOTIATE AND UNDERTOOK MERELY TO PRESENT A PROPOSAL TO ME,
WHILE ALSO EMPHASISING THAT HE COULD GIVE NO GUARANTEE THAT IT
WOULD BE ACCEPTED.
7. I UNDERSTAND FROM SELLERS THAT IT IS NOW BEING SUGGESTED
IN LONDON THAT I SHOULD BE REFUSED AUTHORITY TO NEGOTIATE ON
ANY NON-COTTON RESTRAINTS (1.E. INCLUDING THE EXISTING POLYESTER/
COTTON RESTRAINTS) UNTIL THE QUESTION OF U.K. POLICY WITH REGARD
TO INTERNATIONAL MOVES FOR RESTRAINT ON M.M.F. ITEMS HAS BEEN
TO MINISTERS. I AM BOUND TO SAY THAT THIS SEEMS TO ME WHOLLY
UNREASONABLE. IN JUNE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT THE EXISTING POLICY
STANDS (AFTER IT HAD BEEN CALLED IN QUESTION JUST BEFORE THE
SWEDISH NEGOTIATIONS) AND YOU HAVE GIVEN ME NO INDICATION THAT
THIS POLICY WAS UNDER REVIEW AGAIN.
CERTAINLY JORDAN HAD NO
SUCH INDICATION, BUT RATHER TO THE CONTRARY, BEFORE HE WENT
TO OTTAWA,
/8. IF
CONFIDENTIAL