2.
7:
already mentioned, the Group felt this restraint should be
conceded.
b) Knitwear:
Production dropped in 1968. There was also
a marked decline in imports compared with the previous two years
but this was for the most part due to the fact that South Korea
had agreed to restrict her exports of women's and girls'
discontinuous knitwear to Sweden. Hong Kong exports had risen
to some extent as a result and although this was also felt to be
a somewhat weak case, the Group agreed that this restraint should
be conceded for the same basic reasons as that on Anoraks.
New items on which restraints” had been requested.
ä) Dress Shirts: This was the most difficult of the new items
because, although Hong Kong and Industries 1 were agreed that the
shirt industry was one unit using a variety of fibres, Industries 1
felt that the Swedes should impose non-discriminatory restrictions
on shirts by taking action under Article XIX of the G.A.T.T., whilst
Hong Kong felt that they must concede this restraint on shirts, as
Sweden already restricted her imports of synthetic shirts from
all low cost suppliers other than Hong Kong. (Hong Kong exports.
of cotton shirts to Sweden was already restrained under the LTA).
An agreement by Hong Kong to restrain her exports of synthetic
shirts to Sweden would be "the last brick in the wall".
There was
a weak case under Article XIX for synthetic woven shirts taken in
isolation since both production and consumption had risen.
b) Blouses (Woven, synthetic): There appeared to be, a fairly
good case to concede restraint.
half the quantity of imports (most of which came from Hong Kong).
There had been some disagreement in the Group as to whether or not
cotton and non-cotton blouses should be aggregated since the two
together showed only a small drop in production and since the end
of 1968 there had been a falling-off in imports of cotton blouses.
Froduction had fallen in 1968 to about
/c)