0003230
G.F. 323
CONFIDENTIAL
20
Seventh Session (Plenary)
2.30 p.m. Thursday 24th April, 1969
75.
and
Referring to Mr. Jordan's closing remarks at the previous session, Baron de Geer said that the final sentence of the Swedish
A mere Note did not specify the proposed scope of future controls. extension of existing arrangements would accordingly mean that the same forms of control would be applied to the same items, whereas the Swedish request included the dropping of certain items, and the addition of some new ones in their place. Mr. Goldsmith, he continued, understood that the Swedish delegation would wish to discuss all items in the tables attached to the Memorandum and Note. Mr. Kjellberg said that when he presented the Note of 27th March 1969 to Mr. Jordan, he and Mr. Jordan went through the tables, and he had indicated that the Swedish Government was concerned with the items included in the statistical annex. Mr. Jordan replied that Mr. Kjellberg was then uncertain of his government's intentions. The Swedish tables gave no explanations as to their inclusion, no indications as to the items which the Swedish government might wish to drop.
There was no indication of what the Swedish Government's intentions were before the Swedish delegation arrived. Therefore in Hong Kong's reply of 3rd April 1969 to the Note of 27th March 1969, Hong Kong expressed surprise at the variance between the last sentence
He of the Memorandum, and the coverage of the accompanying tables. understood that Mr. Goldsmith's impression was that the consultations would be about those items currently under restraint and the extension of the export authorisation schemes. His instructions were to examine the need for continuing the existing arrangements, and that he would have to consult the Board of Trade before he could agree to extend the coverage because Hong Kong must consider the implications of any extension not only in terms of Hong Kong - Swedish trade, but also in terms of international commercial policy.
76.
Baron de Geer regretted that misunderstanding should have arisen over the interpretation of the Memorandum. He said that if it was not possible for the Hong Kong delegation to discuss their request on the non-cotton items, he would like to have further consultations held in June before the existing Undertaking expired. On that understanding, both teams agreed to continue to examine the Swedish proposals made in the morning session. Mr. Jordan said that the requests on the cotton and non-cotton items must be treated separately, and he could not agree to have joint quotas for cotton and non-cotton garments. Nonetheless he reminded the Swedish delegation that Hong Kong would find it easier to meet the Swedish requests on the cotton items, if the Swedish delegation could see their way to accommodating Hong Kong on the non-cotton side.
77.
Baron de Geer said that his government did not have the same doctrinal position about cotton and non-cotton textiles as Hong Kong. The Swedish Government had to balance its wish to help Hong Kong against the Swedish textiles industry's difficulties, which were more serious in the non-cotton sector. However, he agreed that there could continue to be separate quotas for cotton and non-cotton restraint items.
Cotton Garments Table 1
Knitwear: shirts, nightgarments and under garments)
78.
Mr. Jordan commented that the case here was better than some of the others and Hong Kong could restrain these under one group.
/Cotton Garments....
CONFIDENTIAL