- 2
"Another problem is that unilateral import control would mean another set of data, in addition to that maintained by Hong Kong. There could be discrepancies in data, and confusion and uncertainty to the trade.
"Our export control system is well established and widely accepted by traders and all of our major trading partners. It is our right to expect the continuation of the system," he said.
"We will therefore reiterate our position that the US unilateral move is unjustified, and will continue to endeavour to protect our rights and ensure that our trade will not be unduly disrupted.
"We will also try to reach agreement with the US on a set of administrative arrangements for the implementation of Article 2 of the ATC. When agreed, the set of administrative arrangements will be notified to the WTO Textiles Monitoring Body in Geneva."
Under the ATC, Members have to agree bilaterally on a set of administrative arrangements they deem necessary for the implementation of provisions on quantitative restrictions in Article 2 of the ATC. Such arrangements reached by Members have to be notified to the Textiles Monitoring Body established under the ATC.
Mr Ying said: "Our position on US call on our Category 440 is simple. We think the call is unjustifiable both in principle because it contravenes the relevant provisions in the ACT, and in practice because the facts show that our very limited imports cannot have caused any damage to the US industry."
"We will therefore repeat our demand for the call to be revoked," he added.
In 1994, Hong Kong's Category 440 exports to the US was 5,046 dozens or 2.3 per cent of the total US market.
End/Sunday, August 20, 1995
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.