PA
12
c.c. Mr Lam
Mr Allott
CRE:1
CRM:1
19.5
Miss Lackey
CRE: 2
MR E J CROWHURST (CTD)
Miss Welch
CRE: 2
Mr Wright
CRE: 3
Mr Penrice
Ec93
Hr Jefferies
EOS1
Mr Cousin
Ec33)
Mir Wells
(Ec33)
Mr Bentliff
Mr Brearley
Revised Submission on Knitwear
and Draft Letter to the Trade
Association
Mr Hazle
Kr Burns
Mr Goodfellow
(FCO)
Mr Dodds
FCO
(FCO)
FCO).
Miss Lowne
Mr Gwinnell
Mr Hope
Mr Pownall Mr Pryke
CT1
CT2
CTL (EF1) (CT2(b)
As regards the revised submission, CRE:1 are entirely content.
2.
We should like to see some amendments to the penultimate sentence on Page 4, which would, in our opinion, bring it more into line with the guidelines originally set out in Kr Chataway's letter of 10 August. The amended sentence would read as follows;
"In examining this disruption we take into account, as
relevant to instead of apart from the question of the prospective viability of the sector concerned, such factors as the proportion of market growth likely to be taken by low-priced imports, Whether they threatened employment, and the effect on profitability"
The original guidelines didn't refer to market growth, and we want to avoid any suggestion that such growth should be reserved for the home industry; likewise they didn't refer specifically to threats to new employment (an issue in the polyester/cotton case was how far this should be taken into account) A "threat to employment" is a general phrase which can cover either case.
3. I have discussed these amendments with Mr Lam, who agrees.
(Miss J E Elliott)
CRE:1
Room V/460: Extn:2621
19 January 1973