1
r Jones wondered whether the working group could be prevented from granting the Commission the mandate it was seeking. DTI and FCO officials felt that any blocking action by the UK would lead to reference to a higher level within the Community, and that it would be very difficult politically to continue to attempt to prevent the Commission from dealing with a problem whose existence we could not deny, especially as we were in the invidious position of having dealt with our own parallel problem independently.
Mr Jones said that he was surprised that there was still any problem, since informal contacts with both German and Dutch officials in Brussels before 22 February had suggested that neither country was going to press for Community action. Hong Kong had been prepared, as was recorded, to consider unilateral action on exports to Benelux in addition to Germany, but had judged that this would not be necessary. It was then suggested that even at this late stage some such action would be possible. There was a difficulty in that disruption of the Dutch market (Belgium somehow manages not to import much) was doubtful proposition than the German case. Mr Jones asked what line the UK would take on 16 March if Hong Kong had taken action of this kind. Miss Lowne agreed that this would alter the situation materially. The Commission would be in a difficulty because its attempt to find a Community solution would appear thwarted. But the UK could certainly argue that in the changed circumstances the mandate should be referred back for further study if not actually abandoned, and in this way weeks if not months of delay would be gained.
Mr Jones told the meeting that on this understanding he would seek the agreement of his colleagues to take suitable unilateral action on exports of certain non-cotton goods to Benelux.
CT Division
13 March 1973
{