GRS 1120
PRIORITY
RESTRICTED· ·
PA
CYPHER CAT A
FM UKREP BRUSSELS 021545Z
た
334+8.
(125)
RESTRICTED
FRAME
TO PRIORITY F C O TELNO. 4598 OF 2 0CTOBER.
1973
3/1⁄2
1.
MEETING OF WORKING GROUP ON GENERALISED PREFERENCES 1 OCTOBER. MY TELNO. 4632. NCF
THE AGENDA FOR THE MEETING (MY TELEGRAM UNDER REFERENCE) Did NOT INCLUDE CONSIDERATION OF THE UK AND DUTCH PROPOSALS FOR ADDITIONS TO THE PROCESSED AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS SECTION OF THE SCHEME ALTHOUGH IT HAD BEEN AGREED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING THAT, THESE SHOULD BE DISCUSSED.
LAM (UK) DREW ATTENTION TO THIS AND,
MORE GENERALLY, TO THE LACK OF PROGRESS BY THE GROUP TOWARDS ACHIEVING WORTHWHILE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE COMMUNITY SCHEME AS REQUIRED BY THE SUMMIT COMMUNIQUE. OUR LIST OF ADDITIONS TO THE SCHEME ON PROCESSED AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS WAS THE MINIMUM WHICH WOULD ENABLE US TO SAY THAT OUR ACCESSION TO THE COMMUNITY HAD NOT REDUCED THE SCOPE OF OUR PREFERENCES. WE DID NOT SEE HOW THE INTERESTS OF ANY MEMBER STATES COULD BE DAMAGED BY GIVING PREFERENCES ON THESE ITEMS AND HOPED THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD PROVIDE US WITH EVIDENCE IN CASES WHERE IT WAS CLAIMED THAT SUCH INTERESTS WERE INVOLVED. PROGRESS ON THE SENSITIVE LIST WAS NOT ENCOURAGING. WE COULD ACCEPT THE COMMISSION'S PROPOSALS PROVIDED WORTHWHILE IMPROVEMENTS COULD BE AGREED IN THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR, THERE WOULD BE POLITICAL REPERCUSSIONS IN THE UK IF THE COMMUNITY COULD NOT PRODUCE AN ADEQUATE SCHEME AND WE WOULD HAVE TO ASK FOR DISCUSSION IN THE COUNCIL. THE FRENCH AND BELGIAN DELEGATIONS AND THE COMMISSION ALL REPLIED ON THE LINES THAT CONSIDERABLE IMPROVE MENTS HAD BEEN ACREED, 50TH IN THE CHANGE OF BASE YEAR AND THE CONSEQUENTLY ENLARGED QUOTAS IN THE SENSITIVE LIST AND IN THE COMMISSION'S PROPOSALS FOR ADDITIONS TO THE LIST OF PROCESSED AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS, THE BELGIANS ALSO REFERRED TO THE NEED
TO TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE INTERESTS OF THE ASSOCIATED STATES, AND THE ITALIANS RAISED THE QUESTION OF KEEPING SOMETHING IN HAND FOR THE MULTILATERAL TRADE NEGOTATIONS (MTNS).
RESTRICTED
/ 2, THE