RESTRICTED
To: Director of Commerce and Industry, Hong Kong.
From: Counsellor (Hong Kong Affairs, Geneva.
Memorandum No. 115
File No. GVA/10/8/1
228
Date: 14 September 1970
O.E.C.D.
Ad Hoc Working Group on Preferences
The Ad Hoc Working Group met in Paris again from 7 - 9 September to continue work on the preparation of the OECD donor countries' positions for presentation to the UNCTAD Special Committee on Preferences in Geneva on 21 September. Kemmis as usual represented the U.K., assisted by Morris (Board of Trade) and Perceval (Trade Policy Dept., FCO).
2. I enclose a copy of the Agenda which was gone through item by item in the order stated. Given that the work is in its final stages and the UNCTAD meeting is expected to be the decisive major consultation with the developing countries, the proceedings were remarkably tedious and low key. One feels that most of the prospective donors were going through the motions of continuing to consult in OECD, while knowing that in the end they would all go ahead with implementing their own individual schemes with such alterations as they decide for themselves.
3. At this stage in the game a detailed blow by blow account of what transpired would be of little interest to you. Hong Kong's interest is now concentrated on the list (or lists) of beneficiaries and, to a somewhat lesser extent, exceptions. On the former, the Group merely noted that the question of beneficiaries would need to be dealt with by the Trade Committee; and some delegations expressed the hope (rather forlornly) that the Committee would address itself to this question in substance at its meeting next week.
Item 2 Presentation of Revised Proposals
4. Revisions or clarifications to their schemes were presented by the U.K., the Nordic countries, Switzerland, Austria, Ireland and New Zealand. The U.S. and Japan were not yet ready and hoped to report to the Trade Committee. The EEC had no revisions to report.
5. Of these the U.K. and the Nordics were the more important. As already reported, the U.K. will now exclude all textiles from its offer, apart from a few minor items such as carpets. They will not as yet adopt a duty quota system but reserve their position if they later enter the EEC. The Nordics presented what they called a "sensitive list" on which one or more of them may wish to have exceptions, establish duty quotas or make only partial cuts in duty (but no details were given of what would actually be done). The list includes most textiles and footwear, leatherwear, some ceramics and a few other minor items. There was nothing of significance in the other countries' reports. Some EEC representatives (i.e.Wintermans (Netherlands), Laloux (Belgium) ) told me afterwards that in their view the U.K. decision to exclude virtually all textiles would make it more difficult for the Community to do something for Hong Kong.
RESTRICTED
/Item 3