0003230
G.F. 323
CONFIDENTIAL
15 -
Department had agreed, waiting until September. Mr. Haddon-Cave had informed the B.O.T. accordingly in London, and the B.O.T. had then appeared satisfied. The Department had been surprised when the B.O.T. had subsequently again raised the subject with the Hong Kong Office in London. Nevertheless, the Department, on the advice of the C.A.B., had arranged to delay anticipation in the made-ups categories about which the B.0.T. had expressed particular concern, until November. He found it difficult to accept that Hong Kong should make sure that not more than one year's entitlement should land in Britain during 1968; how much was purchased from Hong Kong in any period really depended on market conditions and the demand of British importers. Strong market conditions had created a shortage of quota and the need to anticipate. He had no doubt that the sellers' market was a reflection of the spending spree induced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer's speech earlier in the year on the stern measures which would have to be taken if the balance of payments position did not improve. With the trade so buoyant, it would not have been surprising if the trade in Hong Kong had requested anticipation even in the first quarter of 1968 - and the Hong Kong Government would have had every right to allow it.
68.
To Mr. Stewart's suggestion that Hong Kong had breached a verbal undertaking made in London, Mr. Jordan replied that Hong Kong had agreed not to anticipate before 1st September, and this promise had been kept. As for the three categories of made-ups which the B.O.T. had said were causing particular concern, anticipation was to be further delayed until November.
69.
Mr. Stewart expressed his disappointment and regretted that he had not confirmed his understanding in writing. He said one of the reasons for his trip was to appeal to Hong Kong and India to delay anticipation until November, and he had specifically asked the Hong Kong London Office for anticipation to be placed on the agenda. Now that Hong Kong had authorised anticipation, he was placed in a difficult position with the Indians.
70.
Mr. Jeaffreson recalled that the Department had not learned of the B.O.T.'s wish to discuss anticipation in the present negotiations until 30th August by which time they had already issued the Notice to Exporters permitting anticipation in September and November respectively. He also pointed out that the B.0.T. had not indicated the aspect of anticipation they wished to consider. In reply to a question from Mr. Carter, Mr. Jeaffreson explained the way in which Hong Kong had accommodated the B.O.T. in 1967 by stopping anticipation and by surrendering High Value Scheme yardage to offset the quantities already anticipated.
71.
Mr. Carter enquired whether anything could now be done to remedy the situation. Mr. Jordan replied that any change would have to be on the advice of the C.A.B. and he would prefer for the moment to concentrate on the wide sheeting issue.
72.
Mr. Stewart, while acknowledging Mr. Jordan's wishes, hoped Hong Kong would be able to reconsider its position in the event that India agreed to defer anticipation. He added that, if in the future anticipation seemed likely to cause problems, he would make quite sure the B.O.T.'s views were explained plainly and in writing to the Hong Kong Government. There could then be no further misunderstandings.
73.
Turning to the British request on wide sheeting and sheets, Mr. Jordan said there were basically two sides to the
/problem,
CONFIDENTIAL