Council of Ministers in October, in order to allow the national customs authorities time to operate the new scheme from
1 January, means that we will be pressed to state our position
clearly and preferably to agree - at the next meeting of
T
the GSP working group in Brussels on 12 September.
6.
We do not like the proposal for a number of reasons including
a
b
Preferences for textiles in the UK market increase the
disparity between our liberality and the effective protectionism of most of our European partners, at a time when we are anxious to reduce it.
The concept of tariff quotas divided into Member States' shares is another instance of superfically communautaire arrangements which mask and perpetuate the division of the market into national shares.
want to make real progress towards a single market
for textiles.
We
C
The Community has yet to evolve a tariff policy for textiles, and cannot do so in isolation from other
aspects of textile trade policy; but preferences once granted are difficult to withdraw. The concept of the existing scheme is muddled and probably illiberal, since tariff preferences tend to entrench quantitative
restrictions.
7.
There is also the question of Hong Kong, which is excluded (along with Taiwan and Macao), from the EEC's scheme for textile products. The political aspect is being studied by the FCO. Economically, we believe that the damage to Hong Kong caused by marginal tariff discrimination against her in the UK market in favour of her direct competitors would be hard to measure. It is undeniable, however, that the effect of acceptance by the UK of the Commission's proposal as it now stands could only be harmful to Hong Kong. Opposition to the extension of the scheme to Hong Kong would be vigorous and united within the Community, since this small territory's
-3-