4 March 1993
Mrs S Hogwood
ESED
FCO
Mr Bunten.
ла
03115
RECEIVED IN
MAL 1993
DESK C
Dear Sue
INDEX
R
PA
REC
United Kingdom
16
Permanent Representation
To the European Communities
Rond-Point Robert Schuman 6
1040 Brussels
Telephone: (02) 287 82 11
Telex: 24312
Facsimile: (02) 287 83 98
DID: (02) 287
MONTREAL PROTOCOL ON SUBSTANCES THAT DEPLETE THE OZONE LAYER: TAIWAN
1. Thank you for your very clear letter of 18 February asking us to take preliminary soundings with DGXI about a possible amendment to the ozone depleting substances Regulation to deal with the problem of Taiwan. I have spoken to both George Strongylis and José Hostert in the section of DGXI responsible for drafting the revised Regulation. They have also been lobbied by industrial companies. The result has been that DGXI are proposing to modify the wording in the provisions relating to trade to read "State not Party" rather than "non-Party". They do not intend to change the definitions in the Regulation as such (e.g. of "Parties"), which they believe correspond closely to the Montreal Protocol itself.
2.
Without seeing the text of the Commission proposal, it is difficult to be sure that the changes which the Commission have proposed will (as Hostert believes) be sufficient to meet your concerns. We should get sight of the text reasonably soon, since it is currently being translated with a view to it being adopted by the Commission by written procedure before the 22 March Council. In theory, we could get one of the British Cabinets to propose changes at that stage, though this would mean blocking the written procedure and possibly delaying the submission of the document to Council. Since the Presidency are keen to have the proposal introduced as a formal item on the Council agenda, it would be unfortunate if the UK were perceived to have thwarted these plans.
3.
My recommendation, therefore, is that we
is that we should let the proposal emerge,
emerge, and try to make any additional changes that may be necessary within the Council working group. The fact that the Commission have already begun to address the problem, should give us sufficient locus to suggest any further refinements.
4. As for the agreement by the Commission and other Member States that the correct interpretation of the Protocol is that Taiwan should not be subject to trade controls, the most obvious forum in which to pursue this is the Environment working group in the context of discussions on the new