DRAFT
SUBMISSION TO PUSS (ID)
RESTRAINTS ON IMPORTS OF KNITTED GOODS
1. The deputation from the knitting industry which was received
by the Parliamentary Under Secretary on 18 December stressed the
following points in their case.
a)
undergarment?? onfergarments). (kuilled's canchased
b)
they were seeking a restraint on all knitted goods under
headings 60.04 and 60.05, thus giving supplying countries
flexibility between different knitted products.
They were therefore opposed to a sectoral approach.
The UK industry was highly efficient (largely because of
competitive pressure from imports). Their plea for
restraints for three years appeared to be based on their
confident belief that after that time aligned E.E.C.
arrangements would provide them with continued protection.
They did not argue that protection for a limited time would
enable them to stand up to competition.
c) They stressed the loss of jobs, while also stressing
a)
their increases in productivity.
They wanted a larger
share of the growth in the market to enable them to
retain labour while continuing productivity increases.
Despite the difficulties of some firms in getting labour
they believed that, with protection, there would be
sufficient confidence for them to get the labour to
expand their production. This would be likely to happen
increasingly outside the traditional areas (although
they also mentioned firms' reluctance to move away from
such areas).
1.