RESTRICTED

BASKET THRESHOLD COULD SERVE AS A WARNING SIGNAL WHICH COULD BE

FOLLOWED BY CONSULTATIONS. THERE COULD HOWEVER BE A

CONTRADICTION BETWEEN THE RESONABLY LIBERAL LIMITS AGREED

FOR GROUP 1 PRODUCTS AND A REVERSION IN OTHER

LESS SENSITIVE GROUPS TO THE STRICTER BASKET EXTRACTOR LEVEL.

THE COMMISSION DID NOT YET HAVE ANY FIRM VIEWS ON RE-ENTRY

INTO THE BASKET. THEY WERE WORKING ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT ONCE

A PRODUCT CAME OUT OF THE BASKET IT WOULD REMAIN UNDER QUOTA FOR

THE LIFE OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THE SUPPLIER COUNTRY CONCERNED.

IT WAS THEREFORE PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT TO THINK CAREFULLY BEFORE

APPLYING THE BASKET EXTRACTOR MECHANISM TO AVOID THE RISK OF THE

DEVELOPMENT OF HOLLOW LIMITATIONS AFTER A FEW YEARS.

4. FARRY (UK) AGPEED WITH THE COMMISSION THAT COMPLETE

AUTOMATICITY WAS NOT REASONABLE EVEN IN THE CASE OF GROUP

1 PRODUCTS. SPEAKING PERSONALLY, HE PUT FORWARD THE SUGGESTION

OF A PROCEDURE WHICH WOULD VARY ACCORDING TO THE SENSITIVITY OF

THE PRODUCT CONCERNED. FOR GROUP 1 PRODUCTS, MEMBER STATES (OR THE COMMISSION) COULD REQUEST ACTION AND THE COMMISSION HAVING

CONSIDERED THE CASE COULD ACT UPON IT WHILST INFORMING THE

TEXTILES MANAGEMENT GROUP THAT IT WAS DOING SO. FOR GROUP 2

FRODUCTS, WHERE MEMBER STATES REQUESTED ACTION, SUCH A REQUEST

WOULD BE DEBATED IN THE TEXTILES MANAGEMENT GROUP BUT AT THE ENDOF THE DAY MEMBER STATES WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO REQUIRE ACTION.

IT WOULD BE UNDERSTOOD THAT MEMBER STATES WOULD ACT REASONABLY

AND WOULD NOT NORMALLY REQUEST ACTION WHERE THE BASKET EXTRACTOR LEVEL WAS LOW. FOR OTHER GROUPS OF PRODUCTS, MEMBER STATES YOULD HAVE TO ARGUE THEIR CASE WITH THE COMMISSION AND

IT WOULD BE FOR THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE WHETHER TO TAKE ACTION.

AS FAR AS PREFERENTIAL AND ACP COUNTRIES WERE CONCERNED, THERE

SHOULD BE A PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR ACTION ONCE IMPORTS HAD REACHED

A LEVEL BASED ON THE BASKET EXTRACTOR CRITERIA. THE COMMISSION

SHOULD THEN INITIATE CONSULTATIONS WITH THE COUNTRY CONCERNED

AND TRY TO ACHIEVE AN AMICABLE SOLUTION. IN THE LAST RESORT,

THE SAFEGUARD CLAUSE SHOULD BE USED.

5. THE FRENCH SAID THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN OUR SUGGESTION

ON AUTOMATICITY BUT WOULD NEED TO STUDY IT FURTHER. THE

CRUX OF THE MATTER WAS WHETHER AND WHEN THE COMMISSION WOULD

HAVE POWER TO PREVENT MEMBER STATES FROM APPLYING BASKET

EXTRACTOR MECHANISM. THE COMMISSION WOULD FIND IT DIFFICULT TO

RESTRICTED

JAPPLY

Share This Page