CONFIDENTIAL
37
to London to discuss matters with Mr. Rippon and then calling on the Commission. What timing did Mr. Rippon advise? Mr. Rippon explained that the next meeting at Ministerial level with the Community was to be held on 27 October. He himself hoped to visit one or two European capitals before then. It took some time for the results of Ministerial meetings to be considered by their Governments. Late November or early December therefore seemed the earliest that could make a visit by Mr. Marshall worthwhile. At least one more Ministerial meeting with the Six should take place before the end of the year. The date was not yet fixed. Sir Con O'Neill was confident that New Zealand's problem would not be discussed on 27 October. The New Zealand problem was on the table, but like other major issues it would not be settled quickly. Such issues would remain unresolved until near the end of the negotiations. He saw no danger of Mr. Marshall's contribution to the softening up process coming too late in November or December. Mr. Rippon saw need for Ministerial visits to keep the New Zealand problem in the public mind. After Mr. Marshall's visit to Europe another British Minister-Mr. Royle perhaps might visit New Zealand for this purpose. Sir Con O'Neill wondered whether leaving Paris to the last on a round of visits to the Six might not encourage a tendency to regard the French as the final arbiters. Mr. Rippon pointed out that some goodwill on the part of the French must be assumed.
5. Mr. Marshall asked for Mr. Rippon's views about including Dublin and Copenhagen in his next round of visits. Mr. Rippon saw no objection, provided Mr. Marshall was careful not to show how closely Britain and New Zealand were in touch on the dairy issue.
United Kingdom presentation of New Zealand case
6. In response to a question from Mr. Marshall, Mr. Rippon emphasised that he had no rigid views on how the New Zealand case should be presented to the Community, though he wished to avoid too many formal documents which gave opportunities for seeking adjournments for further study. There would be no sticking (on the British side) on procedural points. His only interest was that the Community should understand the facts of the situation and the necessity for a solution. There must come a point when the Six must respond to the British initiative with a Community approach. This would be the time to test how far the Community would be prepared to go in derogation of the CAP. Britain had accepted the CAP but any special arrangements for New Zealand must involve some derogation from it. He would press them hard on dairy produce, without of course suggesting there was no problem over lamb. He would put to them that the New Zealand Government had decided to seek not Association but a Trade Agreement. Sir Con O'Neill pointed out that the first step was to ascertain what the Community believed to be the facts of the situation. On dairy produce we had produced our paper, but we had yet to find out if the Community agreed with it. He hoped they would accept it. But only when we knew what they thought were the facts was progress towards an acceptable solution possible. Mr. Rippon said there was a range of possible solutions. He would ask the Community to agree to whichever seemed most acceptable to all parties. Compromise was inevitable.
CONFIDENTIAL