11
restraint requested, and Mr. Stewart explained it would be easier
to defend Swedish action across the whole shirt industry than to
justify action on the woven synthetic sector of the industry only.
Mr. Hughes commented that even if the Swedes took action under
Article XIX it would not necessarily make the position vis a vis
the U.K. industry any easier.
ť
Mr. Jordan said he could not help.feeling that the right time
to ask for action by the Swedes under Article XIX had been last
year when the first two restraints had been requested but this hud
not been done.
The meeting then turned to consideration of the possible
restraint levels. Mr. Jordan said that when a restraint on
woven,discontinuous synthetic shirts was first mentioned in February
last, Hong Kong were not then aware of why South korea had conceded
a restraint at a reduced level. It had emerged however that was
part of the payment by South Korea for accession to the G.A.T.T.
and had nothing to do with the Hong Kong case. He therefore
proposed to get as high a level of restraint as possible based on
the 1968 figure of 622,000 plus some growth and with some roll back.
He also intended to take into account that the export authorisations
for 1969 amounted to something like 1.2 million.
•
:
4) Blouses: Mr. Hughes asked what affect it would have on the
U.K. industry if Hong Kong conceded a restraint on blouses.
Mr. Jupp
said that there was no separate blouse industry in the U.K. the
same manufacturers made dresses as well. The general pattern
of the U.K. garment industry was that it was strong on outerwear
and weak on underwear and there was no pressure on blouses so far.
He felt that any restraint might add to the pressure from Ų.K.
industry but agreed that to concede one on blouses would probably
cause less embarrassment to Ind.1. that to concede one on shirts.
/Mr. Jordan