CONFIDENTIAL
and Jagstaidt advised that before writing to the GATT we should clear the matter in the EEC Committee on Commercial Matters (GATT) which is meeting in Brussels on 30 November. They thought that if we then raised it under "other business", explained what we intended to do and distributed copies of the draft, the chances are that it would raise no problem. They did not think it would be advisable to raise the matter in a meeting of the Nine here in Geneva as it would require special arrangements and might therefore give rise to questions and discussion. Luyten and Jagstaidt indicated that in their personal view the way we propose to handle Hong Kong representation after 1 Janu ry was the right one; Luyten indeed said that it was the only way and fully recognised that sometimes (having in mind particularly the Textiles Working Party) the Hong Kong line would differ from that of the EEC. He foresaw the risk however that France in particular might try to find some objection.
5.
This advice seems good to us and we therefore propose that the question should be put to the GATT Affairs Committee in Brussels on- 30 November. It would seem best to play down the whole question as far as possible, and the best line to take would no doubt be that in order to allay uncertainty among other delegations as to Hong Kong's future position (as evidenced by the large number of informal enquiries we are receiving) we wish to write to the GATT in terms of the draft which we would circulate to the Committee. If we can suggest that we were informing the Committee as a matter of courtesy and routine, rather than seeking their approval for what we propose to do, so much the better. We should not, of course, mention the "two flags" solution or suggest the possibility of dealing with the question in any other manner than in the one we now propose. We could add that Mr Long, who has been consulted informally, has agreed to circulate a letter as proposed,
6.
I hope that Bill Nicoll, to whom I am copying this letter, will agree that the tactics suggested by Luyten and Jagstaidt are the right ones. Adrian Buxton will not be able to be in Brussels on 30 November, but has suggested that I should go in his place, and if it were thought right to pay down the importance of this question even further, I might even speak on it, thus giving it the appearance of a small point of GATT housekeeping, of interest only in Geneva,
7. This line has been agreed with Guy Simmons and Robin Allott.
DC Hartridge
Enc.
Copied to:
W Nicoll Esq, UKDEL EEC
M A Goodfellow Esq, FCO (HK & Indian Ocean Dept)
A R Clark Esq FCO (TD)
JV Hagestadt Esq CRE3, DTI
Miss C R Welch, CRE 2, DTI